Graduate School of the Environment

Centre for Alternative Technology

Machynlleth
Powys
SY20 9AZ
UK
Tel: 01654 705981

School of Computing and Technology

University of East London
Docklands Campus
4-6 University Way
London
E16 2RD
Tel: 020 8223 3000

The Carbon Sequestration Potential of Hemp-binder

A study of embodied carbon in hemp-binder compared with
dry lining solutions for insulating solid walls

Naomi Miskin

MSc. Architecture: Advanced Environmental and Energy Studies

January 2010

Abstract

The influence of human activities on the climate has long been the subject of debate, but it is
now widely acknowledged that there is an urgent need for a reduction in global greenhouse
gas emissions if the worst effects of climate change are to be avoided.
In the UK, improving the energy efficiency of homes is an area in which significant
greenhouse gas reductions can be made. One way to achieve this is through reducing heat
loss through the building fabric. The renovation of solid walled dwellings, which make up
approximately one third of the UKs housing stock, is viewed as problematic as to insulate
their walls is disruptive and costly. Conventional dry lining methods of wall insulation tend to
use synthetic insulation materials with relatively high embodied energy, and pose a potential
risk of developing moisture problems within the wall.
An alternative solid wall insulation technique that has been proposed is the application of a
hemp-lime composite to the internal surface of the wall. Hemp-lime is a construction material
only relatively recently introduced to the UK, but has been successfully used in several new
developments. Its potential use in renovation is promising and indications are that it may have
thermal and hygric advantages over synthetic materials and dry lining. The thermal mass and
moisture regulating properties of hemp-lime and its airtight finish should provide a comfortable
and healthy indoor environment, compatible with breathable wall constructions and, to an
extent, future proofed against a warming climate. Hemp-lime is promoted as a natural, carbon
sequestering construction material; however there are concerns over the environmental
impact associated with the lime, which have led to proposals for its replacement with a clay
binder.
This study has explored the carbon sequestration potential of hemp-binder, specifically in the
context of solid wall insulation. The embodied carbon of hemp-binder has been calculated for
various hemp cultivation scenarios and binder types and also for a number of synthetic
insulation materials typically used in dry lining. Assumptions have been made with regard to
impacts over the entire life cycle of the materials, including transport, maintenance and endof-life scenarios.
The embodied carbon results for hemp-binder were found to vary widely with the choice of
binder material a strong influence. The results were compared with those of the dry lining
solutions and examined in the context of the UK solid wall insulation market.
The hemp-binder method of wall insulation is an example of how the challenge of CO2
emissions reduction could be approached in a sustainable manner, preferably sequestering
carbon where possible.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the following for their assistance in completing this study.

My tutor, Ranyl Rhydwen, for his enthusiasm, support and feedback

The CAT cottage team: Marion Wright, Arthur Butler, Carol, Ovy, Annabel and Murdo

All the staff and my fellow students on the course for an inspiring and thoroughly
enjoyable learning experience

Contents
List of Figures
List of Tables
Abbreviations
Glossary

3
4
5
5

Introduction
1.1 Global Context
1.2 The UK Challenge
1.3 Renovation of Existing Buildings
1.4 Thesis Outline

8
8
8
9
10

Literature Review
2.1 The Number of Solid Wall Dwellings
2.2 The Solid Wall Insulation Market
2.3 Conventional Solutions
2.3.1 External Insulation
2.3.2 Internal Insulation
2.4 Insulation Materials
2.4.1 Hemp (Cannabis Sativa L.)
2.4.2 Hemp Cultivation
2.4.3 Lime
2.4.4 The Lime Cycle
2.4.5 Hemp-lime
2.4.6 Alternative Binders
2.5 Performance of Insulation Materials
2.5.1 Thermal Transmittance
2.5.2 Thermal Mass
2.5.3 Humidity
2.5.4 Interstitial Condensation
2.5.5 Air Tightness
2.5.6 Longevity
2.5.7 End of Life Issues
2.5.8 Future Proofing

11
11
11
11
11
12
13
15
15
16
17
18
19
20
20
21
22
22
23
24
24
24

Embodied Energy and Carbon

3.1 Introduction
3.2 Previous Studies
3.3 Materials
3.4 Data Sources
3.5 Functional Unit 1
3.6 Wall Construction
3.7 Functional Unit 2

26
26
26
26
27
27
28
28

Case Study
4.1 Description
4.2 Renovation Details

30
30
30

Embodied Energy and Carbon Calculations

5.1 Embodied Energy of Hemp
5.2 Embodied Energy of Binder
5.3 Embodied Energy of Hemp-binder
5.4 Embodied Energy of Dry Lining Solutions
5.5 Embodied Carbon of Hemp
5.6 Embodied Carbon of Binder
5.7 Embodied Carbon of Hemp-binder
5.8 Embodied Carbon of Dry Lining Solutions
5.9 Transport
5.10 Maintenance and End-of-Life Scenarios
5.11 Embodied Energy and Embodied Carbon for an Average House

32
32
32
33
35
36
37
39
40
41
43
45

Discussion

N Miskin

49
1

6.1 Thermal Performance

6.2 Carbon Sequestration Potential
6.3 Carbon Sequestration in Context
6.4 Potential Barriers
6.4.1 Competition
6.4.2 Costs
6.4.3 Disruption
6.4.4 Availability of Materials

49
49
53
54
54
55
56
56

Conclusions
7.1 General
7.2 Limitations
7.2.1 Assumptions
7.2.2 Finishing Materials
7.2.3 Natural Insulation Materials
7.2.4 Floors, Roofs and Other Building Types
7.3 Further Research

57
57
57
57
58
59
59
59

References
Appendix 1

N Miskin

60
NHER Output Sheets

67

List of Figures
Figure 1.1

Heat loss from a typical house

Figure 2.1

Thermal bridging

Figure 2.2

Dry lining installation

Figure 2.3

The lime cycle

Figure 2.4

Casting and spraying methods of hemp-lime application

Figure 2.5

Heat flux through the interior surface of 25cm wall elements

Figure 2.6

Hemp-binder detailing around window

Figure 4.1

The front (south facing) view of the cottage

Figure 5.1

Embodied energy of binders

Figure 5.2

Embodied energy comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 1)

Figure 5.3

Embodied energy comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 2)

Figure 5.4

Embodied carbon of binders

Figure 5.5

Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 1)

Figure 5.6

Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 2)

Figure 5.7

Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 1) including

150 km transport

Figure 5.8

Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 2) including

150 km transport

Figure 5.9

Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 1) including

150 km transport, maintenance and end of life disposal

Figure 5.10

Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 2) including

150 km transport, maintenance and end of life disposal

Figure 5.11

Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 1) for an

average UK house

Figure 5.12

Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 2) for an

average UK house

Figure 5.13

Embodied CO2 and CO2 emissions in use (FU2)

Figure 6.1

CO2 emissions from insulating the external walls of a UK solid walled

houses

Figure 6.2

Binder comparison with hemp (monoculture)

Figure 6.3

Effect of carbonation on the embodied carbon of lime

Figure 6.4

The number of wind turbines for equivalent carbon

N Miskin

List of Tables
Table 2.1

Comparison of u-values

Table 3.1

Embodied carbon of hemp-binder from previous studies

Table 3.2

Hemp, binder and dry lining materials

Table 3.3

U-value of common wall materials

Table 3.4

Insulation thickness for 0.35 W/m 2K u-value

Table 3.5

U-value for 100mm insulation thickness

Table 4.1

Case study data

Table 5.1

Embodied energy of hemp farming and processing

Table 5.2

Embodied energy of binders

Table 5.3

Embodied energy of hemp-binder (FU1 / FU2)

Table 5.4

Embodied energy of dry lining

Table 5.5

Embodied carbon of binders

Table 5.6

Embodied carbon of hemp-binder (including installation)

Table 5.7

Embodied carbon of dry lining

Table 5.8

Embodied energy and carbon of transport

Table 5.9

Embodied energy and carbon from maintenance and disposal

Table 5.10

SAP 2005 model assumptions

Table 5.11

Building CO2 emissions

Table 6.1

Variability in embodied carbon

Table 6.2

Variability in embodied carbon of binders

Table 6.3

Estimated costs for hemp-binder

Table 7.1

Assumptions

N Miskin

List of Abbreviations
BRE

Building Research Establishment

CAT

Centre for Alternative Technology

CO2

Carbon Dioxide

CO2e

Carbon Dioxide Equivalent

DIY

Do it Yourself

EC

Embodied Carbon

EE

Embodied Energy

EHCS

England House Condition Survey

EPS

Expanded Polystyrene

FU

Functional Unit

GHG

Greenhouse Gas

ICE

Inventory of Carbon and Energy

kWh

kilowatt hour

LCA

Life Cycle Assessment

MJ

Megajoule

MW

Megawatt

N2O

Nitrous Oxide

NHER

National Home Energy Rating

NHL

Natural Hydraulic Lime

OPC

Ordinary Portland Cement

PIR

Polyisocyanurate

ppm

Parts per million

PUR

Polyurethane

SAP

Standard Assessment Procedure

WISE

Wales Institute for Sustainable Education

N Miskin

Glossary of Terms
Air Lime

See hydrated lime

Breathable
(wall)

A wall component that allows the passage of water vapour through its
structure

Carbon Dioxide
Equivalent
(CO2e)

A measure used to compare the emissions of a GHG relative to the

emissions from CO2

Carbon
Negative

A process that removes more carbon from the atmosphere than it

releases

Carbon Neutral

A process that adds no net CO2 into the atmosphere

Carbon
Sequestration

The removal and storage of carbon from the atmosphere in carbon sinks
(such as oceans, forests or soils) through physical or biological
processes, such as photosynthesis. In terms of buildings, carbon can be
sequestered in plant based building materials, such as timber and hemp
for the lifetime of the building.

Conductivity
(thermal)

A measure of heat flow through a material.

Dry lining

A technique for lining internal wall surfaces, comprising plasterboard

fixed to a timber stud, or using a plasterboard / insulation composite

Embodied
Carbon

The total amount of carbon dioxide released in the supply of a material,

product or service during its lifecycle, including sourcing raw materials,
manufacture, distribution, installation, maintenance and disposal.

Embodied
Energy

The total energy consumed in a material, product or service during its

lifecycle, including sourcing raw materials, manufacture, distribution,
installation, maintenance and disposal.

Functional Unit

The subject of a LCA - a unit of measurement that relates to the product

bring assessed and enables comparison of more than one system

Hot box

Apparatus for measuring the thermal transmittance of a material. The

material is placed between two thermally controlled environments and
the heat transfer measured.

Hurd (hemp)

See shiv

Hydrated Lime

Lime from pure limestone, which sets through the absorption of carbon
dioxide (carbonation)

Hydraulic Lime

Lime from limestone with clay impurities (silicates and aluminates), which

N Miskin

sets through reaction with water (Natural Hydraulic Lime) or lime that has
had pozzolans added to the mix.
Hygric

Relating to moisture

Hygroscopic

A material that can absorb water vapour from the air during periods of
high humidity and release it when humidity levels fall

Life Cycle
Analysis

An assessment of the environmental impact of a product during its

lifecycle, including sourcing raw materials, manufacture, distribution,
installation, maintenance and disposal.

Pliocene

The section of geological time between 5.3 million and 1.8 million years
ago

Pozzolans

Naturally occurring or artificial materials containing silicates or

aluminates, which are added to lime to give a harder set.

Standard
Assessment
Procedure

A UK government approved method of estimating the energy rating and

CO2 emissions of buildings. The higher the SAP rating the more energy
efficient.

Shiv (hemp)

The woody core of the hemp stem

Thermal Mass

The capacity of a material to store thermal energy, retaining heat during

hotter periods and releasing it slowly during cooler periods

Thermal
Transmittance

See u-value

Urban Heat
Island

An urban area that has a consistently higher temperature than

surrounding areas due to the retention of heat by (e.g.) buildings and
concrete

U-value

The rate of heat flow in watts through 1m of structure for temp

difference of 1K, measured in W/m2 K

Vapour Barrier

An impermeable material designed to prevent the transmission of water

vapour

N Miskin

Introduction

1.1

Global Context

Following years of debate, there is now a broad consensus among the scientific community
that the global climate is changing and that this is largely due to human activities since the
industrial revolution. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment
Report (IPCC, 2007) states that it is very likely (over 90%) that most of the global average
th
temperature increase since the mid 20 Century is caused by anthropogenic activity, mostly
GHG emissions released from the burning of fossil fuels (McKay, 2009).
If GHG emissions continue to rise unchecked, the resulting temperature increase is predicted
to cause climate disturbance, desertification and rising sea levels with significant impacts on
ecosystems, water availability and food security (Anderson et al, 2009). In order to avoid the
worst effects of climate change, the European Union have set a target of limiting global
temperature rise to 2C above pre-industrial levels, which it is suggested would necessitate a
peak in global emissions by 2016, followed by a steady decline to 50% below 1990 levels by
2050 (DEFRA, 2009a).
Rockstrom et al (2009) propose a safe boundary for atmospheric CO2 concentration of
350ppm due to uncertainties (and they believe underestimates) in the temperature increases
predicted by current climate prediction models, which do not account for long-term feedback
processes. This is supported by research by Schneider & Schneider (2010), who suggest that
atmospheric CO2 was around 400ppm (+/- 50ppm) in the Pliocene when global temperatures
were around 3-4C higher than present. However, this 350ppm boundary has already been
exceeded, with the current atmospheric CO2 concentration at 387ppm (Rockstrom et al,
2009).
Whilst there remains debate and uncertainty in the climate models, and therefore the safe
upper limit of atmospheric CO2, it is clear that all continued CO2 emissions take the
atmospheric concentration closer to or above safe levels. Currently, many of the measures
that are taken to reduce carbon emissions result in the release of CO2, such as the
construction of renewable energy equipment and the manufacture of many synthetic
insulation materials. Effectively, the approach is often to spend carbon now to save carbon
over the longer term, however atmospheric CO2 concentrations are predicted to continue to
increase, even if emissions are cut, as the natural processes that remove CO2 from the
atmosphere are very slow. Only if CO2 emissions were completely stopped is the atmospheric
CO2 concentration predicted to stabilise, resulting in an estimated 40% decrease over the
next century (IPPC, 2007). Given that it is likely to take decades, at best, to achieve
substantial CO2 emissions reductions, ideally carbon already in the atmosphere should be
removed (sequestered) and held in carbon sinks to lower the peak CO2 concentration and
minimise the temperature rise.

1.2

The UK Challenge

The UK government has committed to a GHG reduction of 80% by 2050, with an interim
reduction target of 34% by 2020, relative to 1990 levels (HM Treasury, 2009). This can only
be achieved by drastically reducing the burning of fossil fuels, which given that they are a
finite resource, will eventually become necessary in any case. The cheap, easily accessible
reserves of oil and gas are beginning to run out and much of what remains is located in
politically unstable parts of the world (McKay, 2009). Therefore, in order to secure an
independent energy supply, and help combat climate change, an end must be sought to
societies reliance on fossil fuels for energy.
It is estimated that domestic buildings currently contribute approximately 23% of annual UK
GHG emissions (DECC, 2009b). The domestic sector uses approximately four times more
energy than the commercial sector and seven times more than public administration (Roberts,
N Miskin

2008; DECC, 2009a). However, it is an area in which emissions reductions are feasible using
established technologies and therefore the percentage reduction from this sector may need to
be disproportionately large, i.e. over 80%, to compensate other sectors, such as transport, in
which emissions reduction is likely to be a greater challenge (Boardman, 2007).
An estimated 57% of energy used in homes is for space heating (DECC, 2009a), a figure
which could be significantly reduced through improvements to building fabric, including higher
levels of insulation and air tightness. It is estimated that 60% of heat is lost through the roof
and walls (Scottish Government, 2009), as shown in Figure 1.1. Building regulations for new
dwellings are designed to improve energy efficiency, with a goal of zero carbon homes by
2016. However, existing dwellings are estimated to account for at least 70% of predicted 2050
housing stock (DEFRA, 2007), and therefore there is an urgent need for refurbishment to
improve their energy efficiency if the necessary 80% GHG reductions are to be realised.

Figure 1.1: Heat loss from a typical house

Source: Criswick, 2008

1.3 Renovation of Existing Buildings

Government policy measures and schemes have been in place for some years to improve
energy efficiency of existing housing, particularly focussing on low income and vulnerable
households to tackle the issue of fuel poverty. Such schemes have generally concentrated on
1
easy wins, such as cavity wall and loft insulation, for example the Warm Front initiative.
England House Condition Survey data indicate that the proportion of homes with cavity walls
insulated increased from 22% to 47% between 1996 and 2007 and 36% of lofts had at least
150mm of insulation in 2007 (CLG, 2009).
There is still much progress to be made on these relatively low cost and easily installed
measures, however there is also a need for more expensive, technically challenging and
disruptive measures to address so-called Hard to Treat Homes, such as those with solid
walls (CSE, 2008). Smith (2006) estimates that the energy lost through solid walls is around
3% of total UK energy consumption, contextualised as more than three times the energy
required to run the UK railway system.
There are several options for insulating solid walls, which can be done either internally or
externally. Conventionally synthetic insulation materials are used, although there is a growing
interest in the use of natural materials due to concerns over climate change and other
environmental impacts such as human and ecosystem toxicity.
1

Warm Front is a government funded programme which provides insulation and heating improvements
for vulnerable and low income households in England
N Miskin

An alternative solid wall insulation method that has been proposed is the application of a
hemp-binder composite. Hemp-binder is a material only relatively recently introduced to the
UK construction market and its use has so far been largely restricted to new construction.
However, it is promoted as having superior environmental properties to many standard
construction materials and indications are that it may be well suited to insulating solid walls.

1.4

Thesis Outline

The aim of this study is to assess the embodied energy and carbon of hemp-binder in order to
explore the carbon sequestration potential for the insulation of solid walled buildings. Three
types of synthetic insulation materials are also examined for comparison.

Section 2 considers the potential market for solid wall insulation and the conventional
approach to insulating solid walls. An introduction to hemp-binder is provided and the
properties of insulation materials discussed to assess the suitability of hemp-binder
for solid wall insulation;

Section 3 outlines the criteria against which the embodied energy and carbon have
been calculated;

Section 4 provides details of a renovation case study, from which some of the
embodied energy data is extrapolated;

Section 5 calculates the embodied energy and carbon associated with various hemp
and binder combinations and also several conventional insulation solutions for
comparison;

Section 6 discusses the carbon sequestration potential of hemp-binder and potential

barriers to its use as a wall insulation material; and

Section 7 summarises the findings of the study and limitations of the work, and
presents recommendations for further research.

N Miskin

10

Literature Review

This section considers the potential market for solid wall insulation, the various solutions for
carrying out the insulation (including conventional solutions and an introduction to hempbinder) and the properties of insulation materials.

2.1

The Number of Solid Wall Dwellings

Pett (2001) estimates the number of solid walled homes in England at between 5.8 million
and 7.3 million, roughly 32% of the 1996 housing stock. This was based on housing types
reported in the England House Condition Survey 1996 and taking account of the fact that
cavity walls became increasingly more widespread from the 1930s. The overall number of
homes has increased to 22.2 million (2007 data: CLG, 2009) and, assuming that the number
of solid walled dwellings has essentially remained static since that time, they constitute
roughly 29.5% of current stock. It is estimated that 25% (567,250) of Scotlands 2,269,000
residential properties have solid walls (Roaf et al, 2008).
These estimates correlate well with those reported by Helweg-Larsen & Bull (2007) and PMR
(2008), which suggest 7 million and 6.6 million solid walled homes respectively across the
whole of the UK.
Of the approximately 7 million UK solid walled dwellings, only 2% were thought to have more
than 50% of the wall area insulated in 2001 (BRE, 2005). Roaf et al (2008) consider that
without insulating solid walls, Scotland would struggle to meet domestic CO2 reduction targets
as increased CO2 reductions would be needed from other property types, which would be
difficult to achieve. This could also be considered to be true of the rest of the UK.

2.2

The Solid Wall Insulation Market

The solid wall insulation market (domestic and non-domestic) is estimated to be worth
approximately 91 million, split approximately equally between external cladding / rendering
and internal insulation (PMR, 2008). This is likely to be a conservative estimate due to a lack
of robust data in terms of the numbers of installations and trends in the market and the actual
figure could be as much as double.
A Solid Wall Insulation Sector Profile report commissioned by the Energy Saving Trust (PMR,
2009) suggests that at current rates only 15% of solid wall properties will be insulated by
2050. This is not compatible with achieving the desired domestic CO2 reduction targets and
the report states that currently there is a lack of consumer awareness on the possible options
available and associated costs.

2.3

Conventional Solutions

Solid walls can be insulated either by adding a render or cladding to the external surface of
the wall or by applying a layer of insulation to the inside of the wall. In the context of this
study, internal wall insulation shall refer to insulation on the internal surface of external walls
as opposed to insulation of internal partition walls.

2.3.1 External Insulation

Insulating the external surface of a wall has some advantages, mainly that the interior of the
house remains unaffected, so that it presents minimal disruption to residents, internal floor
area is not lost and redecoration is not required. It is also reduces thermal bridging compared

N Miskin

11

with most internal insulation solutions. Thermal bridging occurs when the insulation layer is
not continuous (for example, across lintels), with the heat taking the path of least resistance
through the most highly conducting material. It is easier to apply an even continuous layer of
insulation externally (Roaf et al, 2008). However, a thermal bridge is likely to remain at the
junction of the wall and floor, as indicated in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1: Thermal bridging

External cladding or render is likely to result in a change to the appearance of the building
and may require planning permission (EST, 2006b). Although in some cases the appearance
may be improved, it can be an unattractive or even unacceptable option for many solid wall
dwellings where preservation of architectural heritage is considered important. This is
particularly true for traditional stone buildings, those of listed status and those located in
conservation areas.
External wall insulation is estimated to cost in the order of 7,600 for materials and
installation, but usually requires scaffolding and refitting of external fittings such as drainage
pipes, which can add around another 5,000 (PMR, 2009).

2.3.2 Internal Insulation

Where external insulation is not desirable or possible due to aesthetic or cost issues,
insulation can be applied to the internal surface of the wall. Internal wall insulation is more
disruptive than external wall insulation and requires the redecoration of affected rooms, which
is an additional expense unless a full refurbishment is being carried out in any case. It does
require a loss of floor space in rooms with external walls, which will be around 2% in an
average house with 92m2 floor area (CLG, 2009) assuming an insulation thickness of 100m.
However, it is generally cheaper (by around 50%) than external wall insulation, costing
around 4,500 for materials and installation with extra costs for refitting internal fixtures, such
as radiators and redecoration, in the order of 1,000 to 3,000 (PMR, 2009).
The common methods of fitting internal wall insulation are well established and are
theoretically simple enough to be carried out by experienced DIYers. The detailing around
doors, windows and other openings is not easy (Rhydwen and Wright, pers. comm.), but is
crucial to achieve air tightness and vapour barrier seal, therefore may be better carried out by
experienced installers. Generally either insulation / plasterboard laminates are used, which
consist of plasterboard backed with insulating material, or alternatively, wooden battens are
attached to the wall and filled in with insulation (EST, 2009a). These methods are known as
dry lining and are illustrated in Figure 2.2.

N Miskin

12

Figure 2.2: Dry lining installation

Source: BRE (2004)

2.4

Insulation Materials

Many common insulation materials are made from petrochemicals and have a relatively high
embodied energy (Berge, 2009; Woolley, 2009). The insulating materials commonly used for
internal wall insulation are mineral wool or high performance foams, such as polyurethane
(PUR), polyisocyanurate (PIR) and expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam (EST, 2009b).
PUR is formed by reacting liquid polyalcohols and isocyanates in the presence of a blowing
agent (usually pentane). The reaction creates a rigid polymer structure and is exothermic,
causing the blowing agent to evaporate and trapping the resultant gas in closed cells. PIR
manufacture is a similar process, but a higher proportion of isocyanates are used (BRUFMA,
2008). Expanded polystyrene foam is made by liquefying polystyrene pellets and adding a
blowing agent to cause the liquid to foam (Greenspec, 2009d).
Mineral wool can be made from sand, limestone and recycled glass (glasswool) or rock
(stonewool), which is heated to around 1500C. The resulting molten material is fed onto
rotating wheels and spun into wool. Resin and mineral oil are added to bind the fibres and
make them water repellent. The wool is then cured in an oven, compressed and cut to shape
(Rockwool, 2009a).
The energy used in the manufacture and disposal of insulation has generally been considered
N Miskin

13

to be unimportant, as this energy is paid back many times over by the energy saved on
heating (Anderson et al, 2009), and therefore all insulation materials can be considered to be
energy efficient. However, to varying degrees they have wider environmental impacts
associated with their manufacture and commonly contain potentially health or environmentally
damaging chemicals (Woolley, 2009). There is therefore a growing interest in natural building
materials from renewable sources that have a low environmental impact and are recyclable
(Kymalainen et al, 2008).
It is important that the performance of natural insulation materials is equivalent to that of the
high-energy synthetic materials; otherwise the benefit of the energy saved in manufacture
may be lost by excessive heat loss in the building over the lifetime of the product. This is
demonstrated by the example in Box 2.1
2

A typical 2 storey 3-bedroom house with 100m floor area has an insulated floor and loft and a gas
boiler. Assume that with a wall u-value of 0.25 w/m2K the house emits 2,313 kgCO2/yr. If the wall uvalue is increased to 0.35 w/m2K the CO2 emissions increase by 6.2% to 2,457 kgCO/yr (Anderson,
2006a).
Therefore the wall insulation with the lower u-value saves 144 kgCO2 per year. Assuming a useful
2
life of 60 years, 8,640 kgCO2/m are saved. Therefore, in order for the two insulation products to be
equal in terms of overall carbon emissions the one with the u-value of 0.35 W/m2K needs an
embodied carbon value (per volume required to insulated the house) 8,640 kgCO2 less than the one
with a u-value of 0.25 W/m2K.

Box 2.1

There are several natural insulation products available on the market, including sheep wool,
cork, wood wool and hemp / flax matting (Greenspec, 2009a). They currently occupy a small
share of the insulation market, estimated at 0.8% in 2008 (Hartman, 2009). These materials
have advantages and disadvantages in relation to their environmental credentials and are
installed in much the same way as the more conventional materials described above.
In contrast, an alternative method of wall insulation using natural materials is to apply a hempbinder composite to the internal surface of the wall. This wet application has potential
advantages over conventional dry lining solutions, which will be discussed in later sections
following an introduction to the materials.

N Miskin

14

2.4.1 Hemp (Cannabis Sativa L.)

Hemp is an annual herbaceous plant native to Asia but will grow under a wide range of
environmental conditions and is well adapted to temperate climates (Ronchetti, 2007).
Despite being cultivated for centuries, hemp growing became illegal in most western
countries, including the UK, from the 1950s, due to its association with the use of cannabis as
a recreational drug. However, industrial hemp contains less than 0.2% of the psychoactive
ingredient THC (Cannaboid Tetrahydrocannabinol) compared with up to 20% THC found in
recreational drug varieties (Rhydwen, 2009a).
With increased demand for natural renewable materials, industrial hemp growing became
legal again in the UK from 1993, but it has to be grown under license and away from clear
public view (Lhoist, 2008).
Hemp has traditionally been grown mainly for its strong outer stem fibres, which were used to
make paper, ropes, nets and textiles, and also for the oil from its seeds. The seeds have a
high nutritional value, providing all of the essential amino acids and have a large potential
market for animal feed (Rhydwen, 2009a).
Most hemp fibres currently produced in the UK are exported for use in the car manufacturing
industry and to make insulation fleece. The woody core of the stem (known as the shiv or
hurd) is generally considered a by-product and usually sold for animal bedding (Bevan &
Woolley, 2008).

2.4.2 Hemp Cultivation

Hemp is fast growing, generally reaching heights of between 2m and 5m, depending on
climate and whether it is being grown primarily for the fibres or seeds. If the primary crop is
fibres, the crop is sown at close intervals, encouraging tall thin plants; if seeds, each plant is
given more room to encourage branching to support seed heads. For a dual seed and fibre
crop, sowing at an intermediate density provides a compromise. The canopy shades the
ground from virtually all the light, effectively clearing the land of weeds without the use of
herbicides. This property also makes it a useful organic break crop, where an economic
harvest can be obtained without displacing a food crop (Rhydwen, 2009a).
The hemp crop is relatively low maintenance, as it does not generally require irrigation,
herbicides or biocides (ADAS, 2005). It is generally tolerant of pests and reportedly very little
fertiliser is required (Murphy & Norton, 2008, Ronchetti, 2007). Hemp cultivation has the rare
advantage of increasing biodiversity; partly due to the lack of biocides required and also as
the seeds provide food for birds and small animals (Rhydwen, 2006). Yields of up to 12
tonnes/hectare of hemp have been reported in the UK, but 6 tonnes/hectare is more
representative of the average expected yield (Murphy & Norton, 2008).
After the crop is grown it is cut and retted. Retting is the process by which the pectins and
gum that bind the outer fibres to the woody core of the hemp stem are broke down by
bacterial and fungal activity. The most common retting procedure is dew retting, where the
crop is left to ret in the field for between 2-10 weeks, depending on the weather. Dew retting
has minimal environmental impact, is low cost and simple and returns 40% of the nutrients to
the field. Other retting processes include water, steam, UV or mechanical retting but are more
cost, labour and energy intensive (Rhydwen, 2006; Murphy & Norton, 2008).
Following retting, the crop is spread and baled. In the west, agricultural machinery, including
tractors, harvesters, drills, sprayers and balers are used for hemp cultivation (Murphy &
Norton, 2008). In China, the crop is hand harvested, which has minimal environmental impact
and emissions compared with using machinery, and also results in higher yields. However,
this is not a feasible option in the west due to high labour costs (Rhydwen, 2009a).
The hemp bales are transported to a processing plant, where the shiv is separated from the
fibre using a machine called a Scutcher. The material is worked through reciprocating plates,
N Miskin

15

loosening the shiv so that it falls away from the fibre. The process also produces dust, which
is usually mixed with chicken manure and used as fertiliser. It can also be compacted into
briquettes and used as fuel (Murphy & Norton, 2008).
There is only one significant hemp processor in the UK, which is Hemp Technology in
Halesworth. It previously traded as Hemcore, but went into administration early in 2009 and
has since has been bought by Lime Technology Ltd.
Whilst hemp appears to be a relatively environmentally benign crop, there are inevitable
environmental impacts associated with its cultivation, particularly if grown in monoculture.
Rhywen (2006) suggests a minimal environmental model for growing hemp (outlined in Box
2.2), where hemp farming becomes essentially carbon neutral by using the hemp seed to
make biodiesel to operate the farm machinery and haulage vehicles.

Minimal Environmental Model for Hemp Growing in the UK

1. Hemp grown organically as a break crop, sown to produce seeds, fibres and hurds (a
dual crop)
2. Hemp could be dew retted and harvested using standard machinery
3. Local processing plants could be a maximum distance of 30 km from the farm
4. Biodiesel could be produced from the hemp seeds to supply farm machinery and
haulage vehicles if possible
5. Hemp straw could be stored at the processing plant
6. Farming could be under contract to the processing plant to control supply to demand.
The processing plant could hire machinery to reduce costs. Preferably the plant could be
part of an organic farm co-operative to boost the rural community
7. The seeds could be the main cash crop sold locally aimed at human and animal
nutrition and used as a fuel source for biodiesel.
8. Hemp hurds could be sold to the construction industry to form hemp-lime
9. Hemp fibres could be processed at local UK manufacturing plants to form pure hemp
insulation bats using potato starch as a binder
10. Limestone could be mined locally within 100km and burnt in wood / biomass kilns to
produce the lime for the hemp-lime
Source: Rhydwen, 2006 and Rhydwen, pers. email
Box 2.2

2.4.3 Lime
Lime was widely used in construction as a mortar, render, plaster and lime concrete until the
discovery and subsequent widespread use of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC). It has
undergone a recent revival in restoration work of historic buildings since it has become
evident that cement mortars cause damage. It is a long lasting material, as demonstrated by
its use in ancient surviving structures such as the Great Wall of China and the Pantheon in
Rome (Bartley, 2008).
Lime has many attributes that have made it a popular building material. It has a high porosity
and water vapour permeability, therefore it is considered breathable and is associated with a
healthy indoor environment. It is alkaline, which helps prevent mould growth and discourages
rodents (Rhydwen, 2009b). Lime structures are also able to mend small cracks automatically,
known as autogenous healing. When any small cracks that form are penetrated by water
vapour, free lime is dissolved and then carbonates filling the crack (Bartley, 2008).
The disadvantages of lime are associated with its environmental impact. Limestone is mined
on a large scale, with associated pollution, loss of biodiversity and GHG emissions (Rhydwen,
2009b). Limestone processing tends to be centralised at industrial kilns, using fossil fuels and
requiring transportation from quarries and to the point of use, therefore lime has a relatively
high embodied energy.
N Miskin

16

A study by Bartley (2008) suggests that the embodied energy in the manufacture of lime
could be reduced by moving production away from large-scale centralised industrial kilns to
small scale local kilns using wood / biomass fuel. For every tonne of lime produced, 1.7
tonnes of limestone is required (BGS, 2006), therefore transportation of the raw material is a
significant contributor to the embodied energy and local production will only be sustainable in
some areas, where there is a local source of sustainable biomass fuel and a local source of
limestone.
Industrial kilns are much more efficient than traditional small scale kilns, due to higher thermal
efficiencies and computer controlled optimisation. However, Bartley (2008) suggests that
small-scale kilns could be made more efficient through better insulation, using insulating
bricks or potentially even hemp-lime.

2.4.4 The Lime Cycle

Lime is produced by firing limestone (Calcium Carbonate, CaCO3) in a kiln to a temperature
of at least 900C, at which carbon dioxide gas (CO2) is driven off leaving Calcium Oxide
(CaO) or Quicklime (Holmes, 2009).
Water is added to the quicklime in a process known as hydration or slaking to form Calcium
Hydroxide (Ca(OH)2) also termed Slaked Lime or Hydrated Lime. The hydration reaction is
exothermic, releasing heat and causing some of the water to evaporate. Depending on the
amount of water added, either a dry hydrated lime is left, or if an excess of water is added,
lime putty is made. Hydrated Lime is also known as Air Lime, because it sets slowly with
exposure to air, reabsorbing the CO2 driven off during the initial firing, to reform CaCO 3. This
reaction is termed carbonation and completes the cycle (Holmes, 2009), as shown in Figure
2.3.

Figure 2.3: The lime cycle

Source: Bartley (2008)
N Miskin

17

If clay impurities (silicates and aluminates) are present in the limestone used to make the lime
the resulting mix will set in contact with water, and will give a harder set than air lime. Such
lime is called Natural Hydraulic Lime (NHL). Hydraulic lime can also be manufactured by
adding silicates and aluminates in varying quantities depending on the required set (Holmes,
2009). These additives are known as pozzolans, after the town of Pozzuoli in Italy, where the
discovery was made.

2.4.5 Hemp-lime
Hemp shiv can be mixed with lime to form a bio-composite material, likened to a lightweight
concrete, with the shiv as the aggregate and lime as the binder (Bevan & Woolley, 2008).
There is some evidence of the historic use of this material in France, and its use was
relatively recently revived (also in France) during the 1990s, where it was used as a wattle
and daub replacement in the restoration of historic buildings (Ronchetti, 2007). It was later
trialled in new constructions cast around a timber frame. By adjusting the mix, hemp-lime was
also found to be useful for floor screeds, in roofs and also as internal insulation for stone walls
(Bevan & Woolley, 2008), which is of particular interest to this study.
The hemp-lime can either be cast within shuttering or sprayed onto the wall using a
compressed air concrete sprayer. The casting method involves constructing a wooden
framework against the wall to which temporary shuttering can be applied. The hemp-lime is
poured into the framework, in layers approximately 200mm to 300mm thick and is tamped into
place (see Figure 2.4). It is important not to over or under tamp as the material will become
too dense or too porous (respectively) negatively affecting the thermal performance and, in
the case of the latter, structural stability (Bevan & Woolley, 2008; Rhydwen, pers. comm.).
The initial set is sufficient to allow the shuttering to be removed shortly after tamping, so it can
be re-used in a subsequent section of the framework.
The spraying process is theoretically quicker and should result in a less dense and more even
coating, however is more energy intensive. Also, anecdotally there are problems with blocking
of the sprayer, which were experienced during application of hemp-lime to the WISE building
test walls (Rhydwen, pers. comm.).

Figure 2.4: Casting (left) and spraying (right) methods of hemp-lime application
Source: Bevan & Woolley, 2008

N Miskin

18

The drying out and curing time for hemp-lime is dependant on the mix, the climate and the
weather and may take weeks (Bevan & Woolley, 2009) to months (Rhydwen, pers. comm.).
Application of hemp-lime as insulation to internal walls can be done all year round (unlike
external construction, as the mix is frost sensitive until fully set), although preferably in
warmer months so that windows can be opened to accelerate drying without resorting to
heating and dehumidifiers.
Although the alkalinity of lime discourages mould growth, the damp environment as the hemplime dries can lead to mould on nearby surfaces and on surface hemp with only a thin
covering of lime (Rhydwyn, 2009b). Following completion of drying-out and removal of the
mould, further mould should not reappear.
Hydrated or hydraulic lime can be used to make hemp-lime, depending on the intended
function. For walls, a mixture of 2:1 hydrated lime / hydraulic lime is recommended (Rhydwen,
pers. comm.). A pure hydrated lime could be used as the binder for internal wall insulating
render and theoretically should have a superior thermal performance to hydraulic lime (Evrard
& De Herde, 2006). However, the addition of hydraulic lime is thought to increase the rate of
surface drying, reducing the possibility of mould and therefore it is recommended that the mix

contains a proportion of hydraulic lime (Rhydwen, pers. comm.).

Hemp-lime can be made from hemp shiv intended for animal bedding. However, products
specifically prepared for construction purposes are available, such as those offered by the
Lhoist Group, which manufactures and distributes the products under the Tradical
Hemcrete trade name. The perceived benefit of using purpose-designed products is the
claimed predictability in performance (Bevan & Woolley, 2008). Tradical HF (shiv) is
chopped, graded and the dust removed to give a more consistent quality material than that
intended for animal bedding. Tradical HB (binder) is a mix of hydrated air lime with OPC
and other pozzolanic and mineral additives to ensure consistent particle size distribution and
setting characteristics (Lhoist, 2009). The Lhoist website warns against using Tradical HF
with other binders as the moisture balance may be wrong for the set, resulting in damp hemp
and dry powder. However, the amount of water added to the mix and the degree of tamping
also have a significant effect on the characteristics of the mix (and therefore long term
performance) and these are factors controlled by the installers on site. The construction of
several hemp-lime houses at a housing association development in Haverhill, Suffolk did not
use purpose-designed products and still achieved a good result (BRE, 2002).
A number of buildings in the UK have now been constructed using hemp-lime, for example,
the Haverhill houses, a warehouse for Adnams Brewery and the WISE building at CAT
(Bevan & Woolley, 2008). No published examples of hemp-lime being used internally as an
insulation material in renovation were found, although anecdotally, it has been used
successfully in Northern France to insulate old stone buildings (Rhydwen, 2009b).
2.4.6 Alternative Binders
It has been proposed that the lime binder could be replaced with clay, which would be a
favourable material with regard to environmental impact than lime (Busbridge, 2009;
Wilkinson, 2009). As clay binder would be unfired, the embodied energy and CO2 emissions
are significantly lower than for fired materials, and clay is available locally across much of the
UK (Wilkinson, 2009).
Clay has been used successfully as a building material for centuries and it is estimated that a
third of the worlds population currently live in earth buildings (Busbridge, 2009). There are
many different construction techniques using clay, including rammed earth, cob and wattle
and daub.
Initial investigations into the feasibility of hemp-clay indicate that it has a better ability to buffer
moisture (Wilkinson, 2009) and a similar thermal performance to hemp-lime (Busbridge,
2009). In an experiment carried out by Busbridge (2009), the thermal conductivity of hempclay was measured before the samples were completely dry and was found to be slightly
higher than reported values for hemp-lime (derived from dry samples in hot box tests).
N Miskin

19

Busbridge (2009) infers that hot box testing may demonstrate the thermal conductivity of
hemp-clay to be similar to hemp-lime.
In order to reduce potential shrinkage, improve workability and help prevent mould growth
several authors have suggested adding a small amount of lime to the clay (Busbridge, 2009,
Lawley, 2009, Rhydwen, 2009, Wilkinson, 2009).

2.5

Performance of Insulation Materials

2.5.1 Thermal Transmittance

The performance of insulation is usually judged by its thermal transmittance, known as the u2
value, which is the rate of heat flow in watts through 1m of structure for temp difference of
2
1K, measured in W/m K (MacMullan, 2007). Theoretically, the lower the u-value, the better
the thermal performance.
As a single value, the u-value is a convenient and simple measurement to compare the
thermal performance of different wall constructions and is widely used, for example by
building regulations, to specify minimum standards for thermal insulation.
However, u-values are derived from hot box tests, using standard conditions for factors such
as moisture content, and assuming steady state conditions. Inevitably therefore, they cannot
always accurately represent real conditions in a dynamic system (MacMullan, 2007), such as
a building with fluctuating temperatures both externally and internally (Coulson, 2009).
Hot box tests are best suited to lightweight insulation materials, which can probably be
reasonably compared with one another using u-values. However, thermal performance is a
function of more than just thermal transmittance and is also affected by the thermal storage
and moisture regulating properties of a material, which become more significant for heavierweight and natural materials. Therefore, u-values are not considered to be a fair
representation of the likely performance of all insulation materials (Bevan & Woolley, 2008).
The examples in Table 2.1 show that, judged on u-value alone, hemp-binder should have the
worst thermal performance. However, the monitoring of two houses of hemp-binder
construction compared with conventional masonry houses at Haverhill (BRE, 2002) indicates
that the insulation performance of hemp-binder is better than suggested by the u-value.
Insulation
Material

Thickness
(mm)

U-value
(W/m 2K)

EPS
PUR

Source

0.38
100

0.22

Mineral Wool

0.36

Hemp-binder

0.80

NHER Plan Assessor U-Value Calculator2

Based on =0.08w/mK (Bevan & Woolley, 2008)

Table 2.1: Comparison of u-values

The SAP3 values (77 for hemp; 87 for masonry) and u-values (0.58 for hemp; 0.35 for
masonry) indicated that the hemp houses should use significantly more energy for heating
than the masonry houses. The houses were monitored for a four month period from
December to April and for the same heat input the temperature inside the hemp houses was
consistently 1-2C higher (BRE, 2002).

NHER Plan Assessor U-Value Calculator is a software package for calculating u-values, which has a
database of u-values for a wide range of materials.
3
SAP (Standard Assessment Procedure) is a UK government approved method of working out the
energy rating and CO2 emissions of buildings. It is used to demonstrate compliance with building
regulations in new dwellings. The higher the SAP rating, the more energy efficient the building.
N Miskin

20

The masonry wall construction complied with Part L of the 2002 building regulations, therefore
implying that the 200mm thick hemp-binder walls also comply despite this not being indicated
by the u-value. In addition, less condensation was noted in the hemp homes. A later study
(BRE, 2003) captured thermographic images of the hemp-binder and masonry homes. The
inside temperature was the same for both houses. The external temperature of the masonry
homes was found to be 4-6C higher than the hemp homes, which may have been due to
heating of the dark bricks by the sun, or could indicate greater heat loss and therefore more
energy required to heat the masonry house to maintain the same indoor temperature as the
hemp house. Evidence for the latter is supported by an increased energy use for heating
reported in the masonry house.

2.5.2 Thermal Mass

Thermal mass is the capacity of a material to store thermal energy. Heavyweight materials,
such as concrete, have a high thermal mass and are able to retain heat during hotter periods
and release it slowly during cooler periods, which can help maintain a comfortable internal
temperature (Berge, 2009). Lightweight insulation materials, such as high performance foams
and mineral wool, do not have effective thermal mass (Bevan & Woolley, 2009). If the thermal
mass is too high (for example, a thick concrete wall), the material will act as a heat sink and
will be too slow to respond to changes in temperature to maintain a comfortable internal
temperature.
In a multi layer wall, the material with the useful thermal mass needs to form the internal
surface in order to be effective (Berge, 2009). Givoni (1998) considers that a structure with
solid concrete walls and polystyrene insulation on the inside will have an internal thermal
response similar to that of a low mass structure. The Society for the Protection of Ancient
Buildings warns that the beneficial effects of thermal mass in a solid wall could be wasted if
lightweight insulation is used internally as it basically cuts off the solid wall from the inside
space (Thomas et al, 1992).
Bevan & Woolley (2008) consider hemp-binder to provide the happy medium of being a
lightweight material with the characteristics of a heavier material which both insulates and
stores heat. Figure 2.5, taken from Evrard and De Herde (2006) shows the results of a
simulation of heat flux through 250mm thick walls made from hemp-lime (referred to as lime
hemp concrete), concrete and mineral wool. The initial temperature is 20C on either side of
the wall, reducing to 0C outside from the first time step. The heat passes through the mineral
wool and concrete more rapidly than the hemp-binder for the first 12 to 14 hours, and once
steady state is achieved the materials lose energy as predicted by their u-values. This
demonstrates that due to the combination of relatively low thermal conductivity and moderate
thermal mass, heat initially travels through hemp and binder matrix very slowly which could
have thermal advantages when heating a house.

N Miskin

21

Figure 2.5: Heat flux through the interior surface of 25cm wall elements in Lime Hemp
Concrete (LHC), cellular concrete (Cell) and mineral wool (Mwool).
Source: Evrard and De Herde (2006)
With reference to the hemp-binder houses at Haverhill, Rhydwen (2009b) notes the
unexpected thermal performance seen in the hemp homes could in part be explained by the
inherent thermal mass of the hemp walls acting as a heat capacitor. This is supported by a
study carried out by Coulson (2009), who observed that less energy was required to heat a
hemp-lime hot box in a dynamic heating situation than a polystyrene hot box (with a lower uvalue).
2.5.3 Humidity
Humidity levels are conventionally controlled in modern buildings by ventilation, however this
usually also involves loss of heat from inside the building, or the use of energy intensive heat
recovery mechanical ventilation systems (Woolley, 2009).
Some materials can absorb water vapour from the air and release it when humidity levels fall.
These materials are known as hygroscopic and are claimed to help regulate humidity levels
without loss of heat or use of energy (Berge, 2009). Regulation of moisture levels can also
reduce the growth of microorganisms and dust on surfaces, resulting in a healthier indoor
environment (Berge, 2009).
Hemp-binder is a hygroscopic material (Bevan & Woolley, 2009), however most common
synthetic insulation materials, including mineral wool and plastics based insulations, are not
(Berge, 2009).
2.5.4 Interstitial Condensation
There are concerns that adding internal wall insulation can lead to interstitial condensation
(within the wall structure) and subsequent damage to the wall (Hutton, 2004).
The average household produces around 10 to 20 kg of water vapour every day through
breathing, sweating and activities such as cooking and washing (McMullan, 2007). The
warmer the air the more water vapour it can hold. As it cools the relative humidity will rise until
it reaches the dew point, when condensation occurs (Berge, 2009).
When conventional internal insulation is added to a wall structure, there is a risk that water
vapour passing from the warm room through the insulation, will condense unseen on the cold
internal surface of the external wall (Thompson, 2000).
N Miskin

22

In order to prevent interstitial condensation, a vapour barrier made from plastic or aluminium
foil is usually fitted, which is an adequate solution if perfectly sealed and if it remains intact.
However in reality vapour barriers do not provide a complete seal, either due to inadequate
care during installation, accidental damage or through the addition of fixtures and fittings
(Wilkinson, 2008). According to Toman et al (2009), condensation in the insulation layer can
be caused by a single nail penetrating the vapour membrane (for example, for hanging a
picture).
Even if the vapour barrier remains perfectly intact, there is also potential for interstitial
condensation on the outside surface of the barrier, when water vapour is driven through the
wall construction from the outside due to high external humidity. This is a particular risk for
south facing (ESE WSW) walls when damp and warmed by sunshine (BRE, 1994).
Given that so few solid wall homes have been insulated to date, it is difficult to judge the
extent of the likelihood of damage that may be caused by interstitial condensation, but it is
potentially significant.
Hemp / lime manufacturer Lhoist (2008) claims that the risk of interstitial condensation is
greatly reduced if Hemcrete is used and therefore a vapour barrier is not needed. No
examples of this performance being monitored could be found, however it does seem that
theoretically the risk of interstitial condensation should be lower using materials with a high
water vapour permeability, which should minimise the build up of moisture within the wall.
2.5.5 Air Tightness
Air tightness is crucial, alongside insulation, for increasing the thermal efficiency of buildings;
otherwise warm air will be lost through gaps and cracks in the building structure (SEDA,
2006). A gap just 1mm thick can contribute significant energy efficiency losses (Bevan &
Woolley, 2008).
It is difficult when installing multi-layer materials (such as dry lining) to completely seal every
gap, especially at joints and around windows and doors (Thomas et al, 1992). It is much
easier to achieve an airtight construction using wet materials, such as hemp-binder, which is
monolithic and easier to detail around breaks, such as windows and doors, minimising drafts
(Lhoist, 2008), as shown in Figure 2.6. This also reduces the potential for thermal bridging
(Bevan & Woolley, 2008).

Figure 2.6: Hemp-binder detailing around window (CAT cottage)

Source: Marion Wright

N Miskin

23

2.5.6 Longevity
The durability of hemp-binder is likely to be good, with the lime-based binder protecting the
hemp (Bevan & Woolley, 2008). Lhoist (2008) anticipate a lifespan of Tradical Hemcrete
buildings measured in centuries. It does not seem unreasonable to assume that hempbinder insulation should last in the order of 100 years, particularly noting that it can be easily
repaired and any holes made for wall modifications / fittings filled in with a hemp-binder mix
(Walker, 2009).
Most manufacturers of synthetic insulation products used in dry lining claim that thermal
performance is maintained throughout the lifetime of the building, although the time period is
not specified (Celotex, 2009; Springvale, 2009; BRUFMA, 2008; Greenspec, 2009b).
Springvale (2009) manufacture EPS insulation and claim that it has a very long life span with
a natural decomposition time of around 2000 years.
No information was found monitoring insulation products over time to demonstrate whether
thermal performance is maintained, likely due to the fact that the importance of insulating
buildings is a relatively recent development, at least in the UK.
It is unlikely that vapour barriers will last as long as the insulation component within a dry
lining composition, as they are vulnerable to damage (as discussed in Section 2.5.4) and tape
materials used for sealing often become brittle and can damage the plastic (Berge, 2009).
Given that membranes are likely to be difficult, expensive and disruptive to replace, the
effectiveness of dry lining solutions are likely to be limited to the longevity of the membrane.

2.5.7 End of Life Issues

There are various disposal options possible for insulation materials when they reach the end
of their useful life. It is difficult to predict which options will be favourable in the future as
legislation and best practice may change (Murphy & Norton, 2008).
Current disposal options include landfill, incineration and recycling. Insulation manufacturer
Kingspan (2008) have conducted trials which indicate that in the future it may be possible to
re-use waste PIR foam by putting it back into the manufacturing process. Celotex (2009) state
that their products can theoretically be recycled but currently there are insufficient volumes to
make a commercial recycling venture viable. Mineral wool can be recycled and Rockwool
manage a stonewool recycling facility (Rockwool, 2009b). Whilst it was not possible to obtain
details of these recycling processes, they are considered likely to be energy intensive.
BRUFMA (2008) recommend that the best disposal option for PUR / PIR is incineration with
energy recovery, or where facilities are not available, materials should be landfilled. In terms
of CO2 emissions, landfill may be a better option for synthetic materials than incineration or
recycling given their inert nature (Berge, 2009), unless they can be used in a low grade form
of recycling, such as road surfacing (Murphy & Norton, 2008).
Hemp-binder can be broken up and reused at the end of the building life (Lhoist, 2008;
Walker, 2009). Alternatively it could be composted or used as a soil improver (Bevan &
Woolley, 2008), although this will result in gradual release of the CO2 sequestered in the
hemp.

2.5.8 Future Proofing

Current strategies for improving energy efficiency of buildings are primarily concerned with
reducing heat loss, given the large energy demand from space heating. However, the
average duration of summer heat-waves has increased by between 4 and 16 days in all
N Miskin

24

regions of the UK since 1961 (Roberts, 2008). Climate change projections indicate an
increase in summer days with temperatures over 30C and by 2050, summer temperatures
similar to those currently experienced in Mediterranean regions (Arup, 2008). In such
conditions, buildings will be affected by overheating, leading to thermal discomfort and excess
deaths. A total of 2,000 excess deaths in the UK were attributable to the hot summer of 2003
(Arup, 2008). Low-density lightweight internal wall insulation solutions could contribute to the
overheating effect as the temperature increases and in this regard, Roberts (2008) considers
that conventional internal insulation measures could be a retrograde step.
Buildings with useful thermal mass can maintain a temperature between 4C and 6C cooler
than peak daytime summer temperatures (Roberts, 2008) and the use of hygroscopic
materials has been claimed to reduce cooling loads by 30% (Walker, 2009). As hemp-binder
lined walls are inherently massive, they should theoretically provide a comfortable indoor
environment in summer and winter (Evrard & De Herde, 2006), therefore may be an insulation
solution that also future proofs homes against the predicted summer overheating effects of a
changing climate. The energy savings of this are difficult to estimate however they could be
substantial especially in urban heat islands.

N Miskin

25

Embodied Energy and Carbon

3.1

Introduction

In order to explore the carbon sequestration potential of hemp-binder, a study of its embodied
energy and carbon has been carried out.
Embodied energy (carbon) is a measure of the energy (CO2 emissions) associated with a
product over its entire lifecycle, from Cradle to Grave, i.e., supply of materials, processing
and manufacture through lifetime, maintenance and end of life disposal impacts, derived
through Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) assessment (Anderson et al, 2009). LCAs generally
consider a range of environmental impacts, such as toxicity and water use, as well as
embodied energy / carbon.

3.2

Previous Studies

Several previous studies have included an estimation of the embodied carbon of hemp-binder
(Bevan & Woolley, 2008, Busbridge, 2009, Rhydwen, 2009 and Wilkinson, 2009), however
these have not considered the effects of hemp under different cultivation scenarios and have
only considered impacts from Cradle to Gate i.e., they include CO2 emissions until leaving
the factory gate, not taking account of impacts from installation, transport, maintenance and
disposal. The studies were also focussed on whole wall construction rather than wall
insulation. Table 3.1 summarises the embodied carbon figures derived from previous work,
which vary widely due to differences in the assumptions made in the assessments.
Source

Hemp-lime (kgCO2/m3)

Hemp-clay (kgCO2/m3)

Rhydwen (2009)

-358 - 62

Bevan & Woolley (2008)

-108

Busbridge (2009)

-35

-196

Wilkinson (2009)

-177 - -18

-167

Table 3.1: Embodied carbon of hemp-binder from previous studies

3.3

Materials

An assessment of the embodied energy and carbon of hemp-binder carried out in isolation is
of limited value due to assumptions made in the calculations (Bevan & Woolley, 2008).
Therefore, various hemp-binder combinations have been compared for a solid wall insulation
scenario, as summarised in Table 3.2. These include the cultivation of hemp using
conventional farming practices (monoculture), hemp grown organically, and also under the
minimal environmental model suggested by Rhydwen (see Section 2.4.2), termed low
impact. The binder alternatives considered were lime from centralised production, lime
containing 15% OPC, locally produced lime, clay and clay with a small proportion of lime.
Whilst the optimum proportion of lime to clay is yet to be determined, Busbridge (2009) and
Wilkinson (2009) used 2.68% lime as an experimental mix and therefore this has been used
for the calculations.
For comparison, dry lining solutions using three different types of insulation were also
considered. Collating information on the environmental credentials of insulation materials is
notoriously difficult (Greenspec, 2009c). Some insulation manufacturers have commissioned
LCAs and in some cases independent recognition has been sought, for example an overall

N Miskin

26

environmental impact rating in BREs Green Guide4. However, it is difficult to find much
information beyond advertising the positive aspects of the assessments, with full details of the
LCA studies rarely available for peer review. Therefore, EPS, PUR and mineral wool were
chosen as materials for which general information (not brand specific) was available.
Hemp Variations

Binder Variations

Dry Lining

Hemp grown in monoculture

Lime (centralised production)

EPS

Hemp grown organically

Lime (15% OPC)

PUR

Low Impact Hemp

Lime (Local production)

Mineral Wool

Clay
Clay with 2.68% Lime

Table 3.2: Hemp, binder and dry lining materials

3.4

Data Sources

Embodied energy and carbon data was obtained from a variety of literature sources, but
5
predominantly from the ICE database (Hammond & Jones, 2008). The ICE values are
derived from LCAs and other literature sources, however are quoted for cradle-to-gate rather
than cradle-to-grave.
Information on the energy requirements of installation, timescales and labour requirements for
hemp-binder was taken from a case study. A cottage at the Centre for Alternative Technology
(CAT) is undergoing renovation and hemp-binder has been applied to the internal surfaces of
the solid external walls. The quantities of materials, labour and energy used in the installation
of the external wall insulation aspect of the renovation have been obtained from the team
carrying out the work. A section of wall at the cottage was insulated using dry lining for
experimental purposes and details of this installation were also obtained.

3.5

Functional Unit 1

In order to compare like with like it is necessary to compare materials on the basis of a
functional unit rather than by weight or volume (Anderson et al, 2009), i.e., the quantity of
material necessary to achieve the same performance. The BRE Green Guide follows a
standardised Environmental Profiles Methodology for ease of comparison between different
2
materials (BRE, 2007). This methodology specifies the functional unit as 1m of material over
a building lifetime of 60 years, which is the convention that has been adopted for this study.
Given that the subject of this study is the insulation of existing buildings, this assumes that the
buildings will remain in use for at least 60 years following the renovation.
The current Building Regulations Part L1B (ODPM, 2006) specify a u-value for walls in
renovations of <0.35 w/m2k. Therefore this was taken as the performance standard for the
functional unit.
Functional unit 1 (FU 1) is defined as:
a sufficient thickness of insulation materials for 1m2 area of solid wall in a UK domestic house
to a u-value equivalent to 0.35 w/m2k; to include repair, refurbishment or replacement for a
period of 60 years
As the thermal performance of all the insulation measures is assumed to be the same, the
4

The BRE Green Guide to Specification (Anderson et al, 2009) is a catalogue of building materials
which are rated A+ to E (A+ having the least environmental impact) on 13 environmental issues, one of
which is climate change
5
ICE - Inventory of Carbon and Energy; a database available from the University of Bath Sustainable
Energy and Research Team
N Miskin

27

energy efficiency performance in use can also be considered equal. It is thought that hempbinder could last substantially longer than 60 years and therefore the calculations are biased
towards materials with a shorter lifetime, which may require replacement over a longer
timeframe.
3.6

Wall Construction

The specified u-value is a composite value of all elements of the wall, not just the insulation
materials. Therefore the wall construction was assumed to be the same for all the solutions
compared, with only the insulation varying. No data was found on the most common solid wall
construction in the UK, therefore, in order to choose a wall construction representative of UK
solid wall houses in general the u-values of common wall construction materials were
compared using the NHER Plan Assessor u-value calculator database and are summarised in
Table 3.3.
Material

Thickness (mm)

U-value (w/m2K)

Concrete Block

215

1.87

Brick

220

1.97

Natural Crystalline Rock

500

3.20

Natural Sedimentary Rock

500

2.58

Slate

500

2.52

Limestone

500

2.20

Sandstone

500

2.58

Table 3.3: U-value of common wall materials

A 500mm thickness of slate was chosen as this had a u-value closest to the average and was
also representative of the CAT cottage case study.
The dry lining solutions were assumed to have an air gap of 25mm, a polyethylene membrane
and 9.5mm of plasterboard. Lime and clay based hemp-binder was assumed to have the
same thermal conductivity of 0.08 w/mK (Bevan & Woolley, 2008). The insulation thicknesses
required for this standard wall construction to achieve the 0.35 w/m2K u-value were calculated
in NHER Plan Assessor u-value calculator and are shown in Table 3.4. The calculations
include a measure of thermal resistance on the internal and external wall surfaces, in line with
those specified by the BRE (Anderson, 2006b). Copies of the NHER data sheets are provided
in Appendix 1.
Insulation Material

Thickness (mm)*

Hemp-binder

200

EPS

95

PUR

55

Mineral Wool

90

*to the nearest 5mm

Table 3.4: Insulation thickness for 0.35 w/m2K u-value
3.7

Functional Unit 2

The maximum reasonable thickness for internal wall insulation is considered to be 100 mm as
in most renovation scenarios a greater thickness is likely to reduce room size to an extent that
it would make it an unattractive option. Therefore, as a comparative exercise, the thickness
of the dry lining and hemp-binder solutions have also been modelled assuming a maximum
total thickness of 100mm. This assumes an insulation thickness in the dry lining of 65mm.

N Miskin

28

Functional unit 2 (FU 2) is defined as:

a 100mm thickness of insulation (and supporting) materials for 1m2 area of solid wall in a
UK domestic house; to include repair, refurbishment or replacement for a period of 60 years
The u-values achieved under this scenario were also calculated using NHER u-value
calculator and are shown in Table 3.4 and Appendix 1.
Insulation Material

U-value (W/m2K)

Hemp-binder

0.53

EPS

0.45

PUR

0.30

Mineral Wool

0.43

Table 3.4: U-value for 100 mm (total) insulation thickness

As the u-value for each insulation solution is different, the CO2 emissions from the building in
use will also differ. This difference has been modelled using the SAP 2005 software package
NHER Plan Assessor to calculate the energy used over the 60 year time period for a building
with each insulation u-value.

N Miskin

29

Case Study

4.1 Description
The cottage used for the case study is located at the Centre for Alternative Technology near
Machynlleth, Wales, and is shown in Figure 4.1.

Figure 4.1: The front (south facing) view of the cottage

The cottage is a two storey mid-terrace with 500mm thick slate walls. There is one room
downstairs and two bedrooms and a bathroom upstairs with a total floor area (upstairs and
2
downstairs) of approximately 60m .

4.2

Renovation Details

During September 2009, all four walls downstairs were insulated using hemp-lime along with
the back wall upstairs (including the bathroom). The bedrooms had previously been insulated
some years ago using dry lining and therefore hemp-lime was not applied in these areas.
Pertinent details of the renovation, including information on the materials, timescales and
energy used are summarised in Table 4.1.
It was noted by the renovation workers that that a team of 3 or 4 people was most efficient,
with one mixing the hemp-lime, one tamping it down, one moving the shuttering and if
available a fourth person to assist. Any fewer than 3 and the process was slowed
considerably and any more than 4 did not speed up the process significantly.
The cottage has a wood stove with a back boiler, which was lit for 2 weeks following the
works to heat the cottage and encourage the hemp-lime to dry. Unfortunately because of
plumbing works also being carried out on the cottage, it was not possible to continue to heat
the cottage, therefore the drying process was encouraged by the use of a fan and a
dehumidifier.
In order to compare the performance of the hemp-binder with a dry lining solution a 1 metre
width section of downstairs wall was insulated with dry lining instead of hemp-binder. The
performance comparison is the subject of separate studies (Potter, MSc thesis in progress,
Rhydwen, PhD in progress and Wright, MSc thesis in progress). The dry lining consists of a
N Miskin

30

25mm air gap between the wall and 75mm of Knauf DriTherm Cavity Slab (mineral wool)
insulation, with a polythene membrane and 9.5mm of plasterboard (Wright, pers. comm.).

Wall area

46.5m

Volume of materials

46.5m x 0.1m thickness = 4.65m

Hemp-lime mix

2:1 ratio of hydraulic to hydrated lime

2:1 ratio of lime to hemp.

Cost of materials

Approximately 500

Labour

228 man hours (of which approximately 18 spent setting up the framework)

Electricity from drying

Fan (42w)- 4 weeks for 8 hours a day (9.4 kWh)

Dehumidifier (190w) - 5 weeks for 8 hours per day (53.2 kWh)
Total = 62.6 kWh

CO2 emissions from

The heating has not been included as it could be argued that the cottage may

drying

have been heated anyway and theoretically the wood fuel is carbon neutral.
Whilst most of the electricity used at CAT is generated from renewable
resources, applying a GHG conversion factor of 0.537 kg CO 2/kWh for UK
grid electricity (Carbon Trust, 2008) indicates that the appliances contributed
33.6 kgCO2.

Table 4.1: Case study data

N Miskin

31

Embodied Energy and Carbon Calculations

5.1

Embodied Energy of Hemp

The embodied energy from the farming and processing of hemp has been estimated from
figures provided by Cherret et al (2005), which are based on UK farming practices with
processing at the Hemcore (now Hemp Technology) facility, as summarised in Table 5.1. The
energy required for hemp grown in monoculture is over 5 times more than for organic hemp,
largely due to fertiliser production.
Process

Energy (MJ/tonne of hemp fibre)

Organic

Monoculture

Land Preparation

286

286

Land Preparation
Secondary Cultivation

143

143

Sowing

179

179

Fertiliser Production
(Nitrogen)

4,485

Fertiliser Production
(Phosphate)

926

Fertiliser Production
(Potassium)

1,117

Fertiliser Application

35.8

35.8

Herbicide Production

44

Herbicide application

23.9

865

865

130

130

540

540

3,600

Total (per tonne hemp

fibre)

2,178.9

12,374.8

Total (per tonne hemp

shiv)2

1,089.5

6,187.3

1.09

6.19

Harvesting, turning and

Baling
Transport

Decortication
Drying

Total (per kg hemp

shiv)

Low Impact

540
540
270
0.27

transport calculation (1.73 MJ/tonne km x 75.2 km = 130 MJ/tonne)

The embodied carbon associated with transport was calculated using 0.12036 kgCO2eq/tonne km,
which is the average for UK haulage and assumes vehicles are 56% laden (DEFRA, 2009). These
figures were converted to MJ/tonne km using GHG conversion figures for diesel (Carbon Trust, 2008)
of 0.25kgCO2 / kWh (giving 1.73 MJ/tonne km). Cherret et al (2005) suggest a haulage distance of
75.2 km from farm to processing plant. This is supported by Murphy & Norton (2008) who report that
70% of hemp in the UK is grown within 100 km of the Hemcore processing plant.
2

there is approximately twice as much shiv produced as fibre

Table 5.1: Embodied energy of hemp farming and processing, after Cherret et al (2005)

5.2

Embodied Energy of Binder

The embodied energy of lime is quoted in the ICE database as an average of 5.3 MJ/kg, with
a range of between 0.2 and 9 MJ/kg and a more realistic range of between 4 and 9 MJ/kg
(Hammond & Jones, 2008).
N Miskin

32

Commercially available lime mixes for hemp-binder (such as Tradical HB) contain around
15% OPC (Wilkinson, 2009), which has an average embodied energy of 4.6 MJ/kg
(Hammond & Jones, 2008). This is lower than for lime, however as pointed out by Rhydwen
(2009b), there is a greater scope for reducing the embodied energy of lime than there is for
OPC.
The study by Bartley (2008), discussed in Section 2.4.3, indicates that local efficient lime
production could potentially reduce the embodied carbon associated with lime production
(and therefore the embodied energy) by a factor of 9.
It was not possible to find a LCA for clay or any published embodied energy data, although
the embodied energy is considered to be significantly less than that of lime, as it is unfired.
Busbridge (2009) considers that clay is likely to have a similar embodied energy profile to that
of aggregate, with a range between 0.05 and 0.25 MJ/kg and an average of 0.10 MJ/kg
reported in the ICE database (Hammond & Jones, 2008).
The embodied energy ranges of the various binders are compared in Table 5.2 and shown in
Figure 5.1 for clarity.
Embodied
Energy Range

Lime

Lime
(+15% OPC)

Local Lime

Clay

Clay
(+ 2.86% Lime)

Low

4.00

4.09

0.45

0.05

0.16

Average

5.30

5.20

0.59

0.1

0.24

High

9.00

8.34

1.00

0.25

0.48

Table 5.2: Embodied energy of binders (MJ/kg)

Figure 5.1: Embodied energy of binders

5.3

Embodied Energy of Hemp-binder

Hemp-lime comprises approximately a 2:1 ratio of lime to hemp; therefore 1m2 of hempbinder at 100mm thickness contains approximately 20kg of lime and 10kg of hemp (double for

N Miskin

33

200mm thickness). As clay is denser than lime, the ratio of clay to hemp by weight is
approximately 4:1 (Wilkinson, 2009).
Table 5.3 below outlines the embodied energy of 1m2 of hemp-binder for functional units 1
and 2 dependant on whether the hemp was grown organically, in monoculture or under a low
impact scenario and whether the embodied energy of the binder component is towards the
high or low end of the range.
Hemp Cultivation Scenario

Binder

Lime

Lime
(+15% OPC)

Lime Local

Clay

Clay
(+2.86% Lime)

Low Impact

Organic

Monoculture

Low

166 / 83

182 / 91

284 / 142

Average

218 / 109

234 / 117

336 / 168

High

366 / 183

382 / 191

484 / 242

Low

170 / 85

186 / 93

288 / 144

Average

214/ 107

230 / 115

332 / 166

High

340 / 170

356 / 178

458 / 229

Low

24 / 12

40 / 20

142 / 71

Average

30 / 15

46 / 23

148 / 74

High

46 / 23

62 / 31

164 / 82

Low

10 / 5

34 / 17

128 / 64

Average

14 / 7

42 / 21

132 / 66

High

16 / 13

60 / 30

144 / 72

Low

18 / 9

26 / 13

136 / 68

Average

24 / 12

30 / 15

144 / 72

High

44 / 22

42 / 21

162 / 81

Table 5.3: Embodied energy of hemp-binder (MJ/m ) FU 1 (200mm) / FU 2 (100mm)

The installation of hemp-binder involves mixing together the hemp and binder, which can be
done by hand, but is more likely to be carried out in a concrete mixer for speed and
consistency. The power output of an electric concrete mixer is assumed to be 0.55kW and
each mix assumed to take 20 minutes and be sufficient for 0.5m2 of 100mm thick wall area
(0.25m2 of 200mm thick wall area). The energy required for mixing per m 2 is shown in Box
5.1.
2

0.55 kW x 0.333 hrs = 0.183 x 2 =0.367 kWh/m x 3.6

2
= 1.32 MJ/m (FU 2)
x 2 = 2.64 MJ/m2 (FU 1)
Box 5.1

Depending on the installation of the hemp-binder the embodied energy may also include the
use of spraying equipment and fans / dehumidifiers. Based on the CAT cottage study, the use
2
2
of fans and dehumidifiers added 4.85 MJ/m (therefore, 9.7 MJ/m for a 200mm thick wall).
However, it should be possible to avoid the use of such equipment if the hemp-binder is
applied by hand (tamping) and applied in spring / summer months to encourage natural
drying. If the hemp-binder is applied by spraying the embodied energy will increase further,
however due to the problems noted with this technique it has not been considered further.

N Miskin

34

5.4

Embodied Energy of Dry Lining Solutions

The embodied energy of dry lining components using the three different types of insulation
has been calculated using information from the ICE database (Hammond & Jones, 2008), as
shown in Table 5.4.
EE MJ/m2

Thickness (m)

Insulation
Type

EE MJ/kg

Density
(kg/m3)

FU 1

FU 2

FU 1

FU 2

Mineral Wool

16.6

100

0.090

0.065

149.4

107.9

EPS

88.6

30

0.095

0.065

91.5

90.6

PUR

72.1

30

0.055

0.065

119.0

140.8

Plasterboard

6.75

950

Polyethylene
Membrane

83.1

0.28 (m )*

0.0095

60.9

0.00015

23.3
EE (MJ/m 2)

Insulation Type
(including plasterboard and membrane)

FU 1

FU 2

Mineral Wool

233.6

Mineral Wool

EPS

203.2

EPS

PUR

175.6

PUR

Table 5.4: Embodied energy of dry lining

Although the occasional use of power tools may be necessary when installing dry lining, this
is considered likely to be fairly minimal and has not been accounted for in the calculations.
In general the solutions for hemp-binder (FU 1) have a lower embodied energy than
conventional dry lining solutions when a clay binder or local lime is used, decreasing further
when hemp is grown organically or under a low impact scenario. The use of centrally
processed lime-based binders, particularly in conjunction with hemp grown in monoculture,
results in an embodied energy higher than dry lining, around twice as high when figures from
the high end of the range are assumed (Figure 5.2). For the FU 2 scenario, almost all the
hemp-binder combinations have a lower embodied energy than the dry lining (Figure 5.3).

Figure 5.2: Embodied energy comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 1)

N Miskin

35

Figure 5.3: Embodied energy comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 2)

5.5

Embodied Carbon of Hemp

As is the case for all green plants, as hemp grows it absorbs CO2 by the process of
photosynthesis and locks carbon within its structure. Assuming that the dry weight of hemp is
50% carbon (Broadmeadow and Matthews, 2003; Pervaiz and Sain, 2003), 1.83 tonnes of
carbon dioxide is sequestered for every tonne of hemp (Box 5.2).

1 tonne hemp = 0.5 tonnes carbon

Atomic weight carbon = 12
Atomic weight of CO2 = 44
Ratio 1:3.6667
Therefore:
0.5 x 3.6667 = 1.83 tonnes of CO2
Box 5.2

However, there are CO2 emissions associated with the farming and processing of the hemp
and these can be calculated by applying a CO2 conversion factor to the embodied energy
calculations in Section 5.1.
The conversion factor used is that quoted by Cherret et al (2005) of 0.00008 tonnes of CO2
per MJ.
Organic

Monoculture

Low Impact

= 1024.4 x 0.00008

= 6122.4 x 0.00008

= 270 x 0.00008

0.082

0.489

0.022

tonnes CO2/tonne (or kg CO2/kg)

Box 5.3

Carbon dioxide emissions from transport have been calculated using the Carbon Trust (2008)
conversion factor of 0.12036 kgCO2/tonne km, assuming a haulage distance of 75.2 km (see
Table 5.1).
N Miskin

36

Therefore, the total CO2 sequestered is 1.83 tonnes minus the CO2 from embodied energy
(Box 5.4).
Organic

Monoculture

Low Impact

= 1.83 (0.082 + 0.009)

= 1.83 (0.489 + 0.009 + 0.066)

= 1.83 0.022

1.74

1.27

1.81

tonnes CO2/tonne (or kg CO2/kg) sequestered

Box 5.4

The figure for hemp grown in monoculture includes an additional figure to account for nitrous
oxide (N2O) that is released from fertilised land (Rhydwen, 2009b). N2O is 310 times more
potent as a GHG than CO2 (DEFRA, 2009b).
It is difficult to estimate the amount of N2O that is emitted as a direct result of adding fertiliser,
as this will depend on many factors including climate, soil type, crop and fertiliser, however
Bouwan (1996) suggests that approximately 1.25% of nitrogen added as fertiliser is emitted
as N2O. This is a general figure more suited to calculating global estimates than for specific or
local circumstances. However, it is considered of use in the absence of N2O emissions data
for hemp cultivation in the UK.
Murphy & Norton (2008) report that for hemp cultivation, 100kg of nitrogen per hectare is
added as fertiliser. Assuming 1 crop per year and a yield of 6 tonnes of hemp per hectare, this
is 0.066 kg CO2e/kg (Box 5.5).
100 kg N = 1.25 kg N2O / ha / yr
1.25 x 310 = 387.5 kg CO2e / ha / yr
387.5 / 6 tonnes = 64.58 kg CO2e / tonne
64.58 / 1000 = 0.066 kg CO2e/kg
Box 5.5

5.6

Embodied Carbon of Binder

In addition to the CO2 emissions from the embodied energy associated with quarrying and
manufacture of the lime, the CO2 released from burning the limestone also needs to be
accounted for (approximately 0.48 kg CO2/kg, Hammond & Jones, 2008). A proportion of this
CO2 will be reabsorbed through the carbonation process, but there is currently no consensus
on the degree of carbonation, which is dependant on exposure to CO2, moisture content and
porosity (Rhydwen, 2009b).
Lime manufacturers tend to assume high carbonation rates, for example, St Astier claim that
their lime products will re-absorb 60-95% of the CO2 (Wilkinson, 2009). However there is an
element of bias as the manufacturers wish to boost the environmental credentials of their
products. Some research suggests that lime mortar does not carbonate beyond 25mm
(Wilkinson, 2009), however hemp-binder has a high porosity (Rhydwen, 2009b), therefore
may carbonate to a greater depth. The carbonation process takes between 1 and 5 years
(Rhydwen, 2009b) and may be inhibited by plastering (Wilkinson, 2009).
Given the lack of consensus and in order to maintain a reasonable degree of conservatism, a
range of 25% to 75% CO2 re-absorption has been assumed (as suggested by Rhydwen,
2009b). The embodied carbon of lime, including carbonation assumptions, is shown in Box
5.6.

N Miskin

37

CO2 released during burning (0.48 kg) + carbonation = total CO2 release
75% reabsorbed
50% reabsorbed
25% reabsorbed
0.12
0.24
0.36
kg CO2 / kg
Embodied carbon from Production Process (Hammond & Jones, 2008)
Low
Average
High
0.196
0.26
0.45
kg CO2 / kg
Therefore, embodied CO2 = CO2 from burning and CO2 from production process
Best Case
Average
Worst Case
= 0.12 + 0.196
= 0.24 +0.26
= 0.36 + 0.45
0.316
0.5
0.81
kgCO2/kg
Box 5.6

For lime binders with 15% OPC, the proportion reabsorbed will be 15% lower as OPC only recarbonates at a rate of around 2% in 100 years (Rhydwen, 2009b) and therefore has been
assumed to have no significant re-carbonation potential. For hydraulic lime the carbonation
will be reduced proportional to the amount of pozzolans in the mix, however for these
calculations, the carbonation range is so large that this was considered adequate to
encompass differences in the amount of pozzolans.
For the local lime production scenario suggested by Bartley (2008), the CO2 emissions from
the production process have been reduced by a factor of 9, but the carbonation values remain
the same.
Embodied carbon for clay has been taken from the ICE database values for aggregate, as for
embodied energy.
The embodied carbon values for the various binders are summarised in Table 5.5 and Figure
5.4.
EC Range

Lime

Lime
(+15% OPC)

Local Lime

Clay

Clay
(+ 2.86% Lime)

Low

0.32

0.39

0.14

0.003

0.007

Average

0.50

0.55

0.27

0.010

0.012

High

0.81

0.81

0.41

0.013

0.023

Table 5.5: Embodied carbon of binders (kgCO2/kg)

N Miskin

38

Figure 5.4: Embodied carbon of binders

5.7

Embodied Carbon of Hemp-binder

The embodied energy used for mixing the hemp-binder and drying using fans and
dehumidifiers has been converted to embodied carbon using a conversion factor of 0.537 for
UK grid electricity reported by the Carbon Trust (2008), as shown in Box 5.7.
Concrete Mixer

Fans / Dehumidifiers

0.367 kWh x 0.537

1.35 kWh x 0.537

= 0.197 kgCO2/m (FU 2)

x 2 = 0.394 CO2/m2 (FU 1)

=0.723 kg CO2 /m (FU 2)

x 2 = 1.446 CO2/m2 FU1

Box 5.7
2

Table 5.6 outlines the embodied carbon of 1m of hemp-binder dependant on whether the
hemp was grown organically, in monoculture or under a low impact scenario and whether the
embodied carbon of the binder component is towards the high or low end of the range. The
negative values indicate the extent of carbon sequestration.

N Miskin

39

Hemp Cultivation Scenario

Binder

Lime

Lime
(+15% OPC)

Lime Local

Clay

Clay
(+2.86% Lime)

Low Impact

Organic

Monoculture

Low

-11.8 / -23.6

-11.1 / -22.2

-6.4 / -12.8

Average

-8.1 / -16.2

-7.4 / -14.8

-2.7 / -5.4

High

-1.9 / -3.8

-1.2 / -2.4

3.5 / 7.0

Low

-10.3 / -20.6

-9.5 / -19.0

-4.8 / -9.6

Average

-7.1 / -14.2

-6.4 / -12.8

-1.7 / -3.4

High

-1.9 / -3.8

-1.1 / -2.2

3.6 / 7.2

Low

-15.3 / -30.6

-11.8 / -23.6

-9.9 / -19.8

Average

-12.7 / -25.4

-14.6 / -29.2

-7.3 / -14.6

High

-9.9 / -19.8

-12.0 / -24.0

-4.5 / -9.0

Low

-18.1 / -36.2

-17.3 / -34.6

-12.6 / -25.2

Average

-17.9 / -35.8

-17.2 / -34.4

-12.5 / -25.0

High

-17.2 / -34.4

-16.9 / -33.8

-12.2 / -24.4

Low

-17.9 / -35.8

-17.2 / -34.4

-12.4 / -24.8

Average

-17.7 / -35.4

-17.0 / -34.0

-12.2 / -24.4

High

-17.2 / -34.4

-16.5 / -33.0

-11.8 / -23.6

Table 5.6: Embodied carbon of hemp-binder (kgCO2/m ) including installation (FU 2 / FU 1)

5.8

Embodied Carbon of Dry Lining Solutions

Embodied carbon values for the dry lining compositions have been obtained from the ICE
database (Hammond & Jones, 2008) and are shown in Table 5.7.
EC kgCO2/m2

Thickness (m)

Insulation
Type

EC
kgCO2/kg

Density
(kg/m3)

FU 1

FU 2

FU 1

FU 2

Mineral Wool

1.2

100

0.090

0.065

10.8

7.8

EPS

2.5

30

0.095

0.065

7.1

4.9

PUR

30

0.055

0.065

5.0

5.9

Plasterboard

0.38

950

Polyethylene
Membrane

1.94

0.28 (m )*

0.0095

3.4

0.00015

0.5
EC kgCO2/m

Insulation Type
(including plasterboard and membrane)

Functional Unit 1

Functional Unit 1

Mineral Wool

14.8

14.8

EPS

11.1

11.1

PUR

8.9

8.9

Table 5.7: Embodied carbon of dry lining

Figures 5.5 and 5.6 below show the embodied carbon of hemp-binder mixes (including
installation) compared with dry lining solutions for functional units 1 and 2 respectively. In
contrast to the embodied energy comparison, the embodied carbon for all hemp-binder
variations is lower than the dry lining solutions for functional units 1 and 2, due to carbon
sequestration within the hemp. All hemp-binder combinations are carbon negative with the
exception of hemp grown in monoculture with a centrally processed lime binder (including
lime with 15% OPC) assuming the high end of the embodied carbon range for the
calculations.
N Miskin

40

Figure 5.5: Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 1)

Figure 5.6: Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 2)

5.9

Transport

None of the above calculations include transport from the manufacturer to the end user.
Average transport distances for the materials are difficult to estimate. Road freight statistics
(DFT, 2008) indicate that in 2008 the average length of haul was 87 km. This is likely to be
lower than the average distance that the insulation products are transported given the
centralised processing of most products and the possibility that products may be transported

N Miskin

41

to a distributer before their final journey to an end user. Therefore the embodied energy and
carbon have been estimated for haulage distances of 100 km, 150 km and 200 km (Table
5.8).
The embodied carbon associated with transport was taken as 0.12036 kgCO2eq/tonne km,
which is the average for UK haulage and assumes vehicles are 56% laden (DEFRA, 2009).
These figures were converted to MJ/tonne km using GHG conversion figures for diesel
(Carbon Trust, 2008) of 0.25kgCO2 / kWh (giving 1.73 MJ/tonne km).

Material

Embodied Energy
2
(MJ/m )

Density
(tonne/m2)

Embodied Carbon
2
(kgCO2/m )

100 km

150 km

200 km

100 km

150 km

200 km

Hemp-lime

0.06 / 0.03

10.4 / 5.2

15.6 / 7.8

20.8 / 10.4

0.7 / 0.4

1.1 / 0.5

1.4 / 0.7

Hemp-clay

0.1 / 0.05

17.3 / 8.7

26.0 / 13.0

34.7 / 17.3

1.2 / 0.6

1.8 / 0.9

2.4 / 1.2

Mineral
Wool

0.018 /
0.015

2.6 / 3.1

4.7 / 3.9

6.2 / 5.2

0.22 / 0.18

0.32 / 0.27

0.43 / 0.36

EPS

0.012 /
0.011

2.1 / 1.9

3.1 / 2.9

4.2 / 3.8

0.14 / 0.13

0.22 / 0.20

0.29 / 0.26

PUR

0.011

1.9

2.9

3.8

0.1

0.2

0.26

Table 5.8: Embodied energy and carbon of transport (FU 1 / FU 2)

The embodied energy and CO2 associated with transport is more significant the denser the
material, highlighting the importance of local sourcing, particularly for denser materials such
as hemp, clay and lime. However, despite their increased density, in terms of embodied
carbon, hemp-binder solutions still outperform dry lining solutions in the majority of scenarios
due to carbon sequestration by the hemp, as shown in Figures 5.7 and 5.8 for functional units
1 and 2 respectively.

Figure 5.7: Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 1) including 150
km transport

N Miskin

42

Figure 5.8: Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 2) including 150
km transport

5.10 Maintenance and End-of-Life Scenarios

Over an anticipated 60 year life span there are likely to be some maintenance requirements
associated with both the hemp-binder and dry lining solutions, if only due to damage caused
by changes to fixtures and fittings. Whilst the insulation materials and plasterboard should last
the lifetime of the building (WRAP, 2006) there is a reasonable chance that the vapour
membrane will not.
It has been assumed that 20% of the insulation in a house will need replacing within 60 years
(to allow for localised damage or disruption caused, for example, due to fitting a new kitchen
or bathroom) and that the vapour membrane in a dry lined house will need entirely replacing
once within 60 years. This assumes that replacement of the vapour membrane can be carried
out without causing damage to the plasterboard and insulation material. The hemp-binder
should be able to be crushed and reused, although the lime based binders may need the
addition of more lime (assumed 25%).
The end of life scenario for synthetic materials has been assumed to be landfill as this is the
current common practice. A form of low grade recycling, such as use in road construction,
would likely have a similar impact. In terms of embodied energy and CO2, transport would be
the major contributor and a haulage distance of 100km has been assumed, based on the
calculations in Section 5.9.
It has been assumed that the hemp-binder will be recycled through crushing and re-use in
another building for construction or repair. Again, there is likely to be some transportation
associated with this process and for consistency, 100 km has again been assumed as the
haulage distance. It would obviously be preferable for the materials to be re-used more
locally.
The embodied energy and carbon from maintenance and end of life scenarios is shown in
Table 5.9 and Figures 5.9 and 5.10. The majority of hemp-binder combinations are still
carbon-negative, even accounting for the additional transport, with embodied carbon values
less than the dry lining solutions under all the scenarios considered.

N Miskin

43

Material

Hempbinder

Dry
Lining

Maintenance
2

End of Life
2

EC (kgCO2/m )

EE (MJ/m )

EC (kgCO2/m2)

EE (MJ/m2)

Lime

1.6 / 0.8

15.6 / 7.8

0.8 / 0.4

12 / 6.0

Lime 15%
OPC

1.6 / 0.8

15.4 / 7.7

0.8 / 0.4

12 / 6.0

Lime Local

1.0 / 0.5

6.2 / 3.1

0.8 / 0.4

12 / 6.0

Clay

0.4 / 0.2

2.4 / 1.2

1.2 / 0.6

17.2 / 8.6

Clay with
2.86% Lime

0.4 / 0.2

2.8 / 1.4

1.2 / 0.6

17.2 / 8.6

Mineral Wool

5.6 / 2.8

118 / 59

0.4 / 0.2

5.0 / 2.5

EPS

5.0 / 2.5

138 / 69

0.4 / 0.2

4.6 / 2.3

PUR

7.6 / 3.8

149 / 74

0.6/ 0.3

8.0 / 4.0

Table 5.9: Embodied energy and carbon from maintenance and end of life disposal (FU1 / FU
2)

Figure 5.9: Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 1) including 150
km transport, maintenance and end of life disposal

N Miskin

44

Figure 5.10: Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 2) including 150
km transport, maintenance and end of life disposal

5.11 Embodied Energy and Embodied Carbon for an Average House

The average UK home has a floor area of 92 m2 (CLG, 2009). Based on this figure and
assuming a ceiling height of 2.25m, an average external wall area of 86.4m2 has been
calculated (Box 5.8). Given the approximate nature of the assumptions and calculation, no
correction has been made to allow for door and window areas.
10m x 9.2m = 92m2
((10*2.25)*2) + (9.2*2.25)*2)*2
=86.4m2
Box 5.8

Figures 5.11 and 5.12 (for functional units 1 and 2 respectively) show the embodied carbon of
insulating the external walls of an average UK solid wall dwelling including the following
assumptions:

N Miskin

A concrete mixer was used to mix the hemp-binder

Fans / dehumidifiers were used to dry the walls
All materials were transported 150 km from point of manufacture
20% of the materials required repair (hemp-binder) / replacement (dry lining) over a
60 year period
All materials were transported 100 km for disposal / re-use after demolition

45

Figure 5.11: Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 1) for an
average UK house
For functional unit 1, the hemp-binder solution with the highest embodied energy (hemp
grown in monoculture with a lime binder containing 15% OPC, assuming values from the high
end of the range for embodied carbon) still emits less CO2 than the dry lining solution with the
lowest CO2 emissions (PUR).

Figure 5.12: Embodied carbon comparison of hemp-binder and dry lining (FU 2) for an
average UK house
As discussed in Section 3.5, for functional unit 2, the CO2 emissions from the building in use
will differ between hemp-binder and the dry lining solutions as they all have different u-values.
This difference has been modelled using the SAP 2005 software, NHER Plan Assessor. The
main assumptions made in the model are summarised in Table 5.10 and the input sheets
provided as Appendix 1.
N Miskin

46

Assumption

Value

Source

House size

92m

EHCS

Wall Area

86.4m

U-Value
2
(W/m K)

Roof
Floor
Windows
Doors

Heating
System

Condensing Gas Boiler

(90% Efficiency)

Calculated from above with assumed ceiling height of

2.25m

0.16
0.25
2.0
2.2

Building Regulations Part L1B (ODPM, 2006)

Scottish Government (2008)

Table 5.10: SAP 2005 model assumptions

The model inputs were the same for each type of insulation, with only the wall u-value
varying, and assume a typical house thermally upgraded to current standards. The SAP
model calculates the buildings CO2 emissions for one year, from which the total CO2
emissions over 60 years and the difference in emissions between the insulation types have
been calculated, as shown in Table 5.11.

Material

U-value
(W/m 2K)

kgCO2 / year

kgCO2 / 60 years

Difference*

Hemp-binder

0.53

2,342

140,520

13,980

Mineral Wool

0.43

2,243

134,580

8,040

EPS

0.45

2,259

135,540

9,000

PUR

0.30

2,109

126,540

* kgCO2 above the lowest value (PUR)

Table 5.11: Building CO2 emissions

The difference in CO2 emissions from the building in use has been added to the embodied
carbon for each material type to show overall which has the least CO2 emissions. The results
are shown in Figure 5.13 and indicate that despite the lower embodied carbon for hempbinder, over a 60-year period the dry lining solutions outperform the hemp-binder in terms of
total CO2 emissions, because of their lower u-values. Of the dry lining solutions, PUR
performs particularly well, as its u-value is significantly lower than the other materials.
It should be noted that the building CO2 emissions figures vary depending on the assumptions
in the SAP model, therefore are used as an example only.

N Miskin

47

Figure 5.13: Embodied CO2 and CO2 emissions in use*

*relative to PUR, the material with the lowest CO2 emissions in use

N Miskin

48

Discussion

6.1

Thermal Performance

It is clear from the calculations in Section 5.11 that if hemp-binder is assumed to have a
thermal performance in line with its u-value then it will need to be applied at a thickness
sufficient to give it an equal u-value to other insulation materials, otherwise the benefit of its
low embodied carbon will be negated by excessive CO2 emissions from heating the building
over its lifetime. This is likely to make it unattractive as an internal insulation material due to a
greater loss of floor space than may be achieved using other products with a lower u-value for
less thickness.
However, given the discussion on the thermal performance of hemp-binder in Section 2.5.1, it
is considered likely that it will perform at least as well as the dry lining solutions at a thickness
of less than 200mm. Discussion with Powys Council Building Regulations Department
regarding the CAT cottage refurbishment indicated that they were satisfied that the 500mm
thick slate wall and 100mm of hemp-lime would achieve a u-value equivalent to 0.35 W/m2K
(Rhydwyn, pers. comm.).
In addition, the wall u-value for the hemp houses at Haverhill (0.58 W/m2K) is slightly higher
than the u-value for the wall with 100mm hemp-binder insulation modelled here (0.53 W/m2K),
and was found to have a better thermal performance than the masonry homes at Haverhill,
which had a wall u-value of 0.35 W/m2K.
Whilst further research and monitored examples will be necessary to demonstrate that
100mm of hemp-binder insulation will achieve a thermal performance in line with a u-value of
2
0.35 W/m K (or better), it does not seem unreasonable to suppose that this may be the case
and therefore this has been assumed for the remainder of this discussion. If research were to
contradict current indications and demonstrate that the u-value of hemp-binder is a
reasonable indicator of its performance, then its use as internal wall insulation for solid wall
houses may have only limited application and is less likely to have the potential to become
mainstream.

6.2

Carbon Sequestration Potential

The carbon sequestration potential of hemp-binder is extremely variable depending on the

source of the hemp and binder, the distances transported, the installation technique,
maintenance requirements and end of life disposal option.
For ease of comparison, a best case, worst case and most likely scenario have been taken
from the results in Section 5, defined in Box 6.1.
Best Case

Most Likely
Current
Scenario

N Miskin

Hemp grown under the low impact model

Clay binder, with clay obtained from site (assuming low value of the EC
range)

Hemp-binder mixed by hand and not requiring use of fans/dehumidifiers to

accelerate drying.

No additional materials required for any maintenance / repairs

Re-use locally at end of building life

Hemp grown in monoculture

Lime binder from centralised source (assuming 50% carbonation and the
average value from the EC range)

Materials transported 150 km to site

49

Worst Case

Hemp-binder mixed using a concrete mixer and fans/dehumidifiers required

for drying

20% of materials requiring repair over building lifetime using original

materials and 25% extra lime

Re-use at end of building life requiring 100 km transport

Hemp grown in monoculture

Lime binder containing 15% OPC (assuming 25% carbonation and the high
value of the EC range)

Materials transported 200 km to site

Hemp-binder mixed using a concrete mixer and fans/dehumidifiers required

for drying

20% of materials requiring repair over building lifetime using original

materials and 25% extra lime

Re-use at end of building life requiring 100 km transport

Box 6.1

Figure 6.3 shows the CO2 emissions from each scenario compared with the dry lining
solutions (from FU 1, therefore all with the same u-value of 0.35 W/m 2K) assuming all 7
million solid wall houses in the UK were insulated. The CO2 emissions in kgCO2/m2 are also
indicated.
The best case hemp-binder scenario could potentially sequester over 10 million tonnes of
CO2, whilst the worst case (mineral wool) would emit nearly 10 million tonnes. The current
most likely hemp-binder scenario is closer to the worst case than the best case, although is
(just) carbon negative. However, even the worst case hemp-binder scenario has half the CO2
emissions of EPS, which has the lowest embodied energy of all the dry lining solutions. It is
obviously unrealistic to assume that all solid walled homes would be insulated using the same
materials, however the comparison demonstrates the potential of hemp-binder and indicates
the magnitude of emissions if only synthetic materials are used.

Figure 6.1: CO2 emissions from insulating the external walls of all UK solid wall houses using
best, worst and most likely hemp-binder scenarios and dry lining solutions.
N Miskin

50

The best-case scenario sequesters -17.90 kgCO2/m2 and the worst-case emits 6.45
kgCO2/m2, a difference of 24.34 kgCO2/m2. These figures correlate reasonably well with those
derived from previous studies (Section 3.2), however they cannot be directly compared due to
differences in the assumptions made. In order to establish which of the contributing factors to
the overall embodied carbon is the most variable, the differences between the minimum and
maximum values have been calculated, as shown in Table 6.1.
Embodied Carbon
(kgCO2/m2)

Minimum

Maximum

Difference

Hemp

-18.12

-12.70

5.42

22.26

Binder

0.10

16.26

16.16

66.38

Transport

0.12

0.72

0.60

2.47

Installation

0.00

0.92

0.92

3.78

Maintenance / End of Life

0.00

1.25

1.25

5.11

Total

-17.90

6.45

24.34

100

Table 6.1: Variability in embodied carbon

The materials (hemp and binder) make the largest contribution to the overall embodied
carbon value. Whilst the source of the hemp makes a significant difference to the overall
value, it is less variable than the binder material by a factor of three; therefore it is the
selection of the binder material that can make the biggest difference to the overall embodied
carbon. Under the scenarios considered, transport, installation (mixing and drying) and
maintenance / end of life contributions have a relatively small effect in comparison.
Considering the binder in more detail, there is a greater difference between the high and low
end of the assumed ranges for lime than for clay (see Table 6.2).
Binder

Minimum

Average

Maximum

Difference

Lime Centralised

6.32

10

16.2

9.88

Lime 15% OPC

7.8

11

16.2

8.4

Lime Local

2.8

5.4

8.2

5.4

Clay

0.1

0.4

0.5

0.4

Clay 2.68% Lime

0.28

0.48

0.92

0.64

Table 6.2: Variability in embodied carbon of binders

The average embodied carbon for centralised lime and lime with 15% OPC is around twice
that for local lime and around 25 times that of clay. Figure 6.1 shows the variation in hemp2
binder embodied carbon with hemp grown in monoculture (sequestering 12.7 kgCO2/m ) and
all the various binders.

N Miskin

51

Figure 6.2: Binder comparison with hemp (monoculture)

The extent of carbonation (assumed range 25% to 75%) has a significant effect on the
embodied carbon of the lime binders, in some cases contributing more to the overall CO2
emissions than the embodied carbon from the production process, as shown in Figure 6.2.

Figure 6.2: Effect of carbonation on embodied carbon of lime

N Miskin

52

6.3

Carbon Sequestration in Context

In order to put the carbon sequestration potential of hemp-binder as an insulation solution into
context, the number of wind turbines that could be installed for the same amount of carbon
sequestered if all solid walled UK homes were insulated has been calculated. The average
size wind turbine installed onshore in the UK is 2 MW (BWEA, 2007) and therefore this has
been used for the calculations.
The embodied carbon of electricity generation is calculated by LCA in the same way as for
building materials. The common functional unit is gCO2 per kWh of electricity generated,
which for UK wind is approximately 4.64 gCO2/kWh (POST, 2006). This figure is based on an
LCA commissioned by turbine manufacturer Vestas for a 2 MW onshore turbine in Denmark
(Elsam, 2004), however it is not clear what changes (if any) have been made to ensure it is
relevant to the UK. However, as this is the figure quoted in current UK government
documentation, it has been used in the absence of more transparent UK information.
The embodied carbon per turbine is obviously dependant on the size of the turbine, how
much electricity it generates and its lifetime, however using assumptions for average UK
turbines (BWEA, 2007), which are similar to the assumptions in the Elsam (2004) LCA, the
embodied carbon is calculated at 487.8 tonnes CO2 for a 2 MW turbine (Box 6.2).

Electricity Generated (kWh) = A x 0.3 x 8760

Where:
A is the rated capacity of the turbine in kW
0.3 is a constant representing the capacity factor (accounting for intermittent nature of wind,
availability of wind turbines and array losses)
8760 is the number of hours in a year
(BWEA, 2007)
The rated capacity of the average wind turbine installed onshore in the UK is 2000 kW and is
expected to last 20 years (BWEA, 2007).
2000 x 0.3 x 8760 = 5,256,000 kWh per year
5,256,000 x 20 = 105,120,000 kWh per turbine lifetime
4.64 gCO2/kWh = 0.00464 kgC02/kWh
0.00464 x 105,120,000 = 487,756.8 kgCO2 or 487.8 tonnes CO2 per 2MW turbine
Box 6.2

The number of wind turbines that could be installed for the equivalent amount of CO2
sequestered by the insulation solutions is shown in Figure 6.4, calculated by dividing the
embodied carbon of the insulation measures by the embodied carbon of a wind turbine (in
tonnes).

N Miskin

53

Figure 6.4: The number of wind turbines for equivalent carbon

An average 2MW wind turbine can provide enough electricity in one year for over 1,000
homes (BWEA, 2007). Therefore the 22 thousand turbines that could be built with the
equivalent amount of carbon sequestered under the best case hemp-binder scenario is more
than required to power the UKs 22.2 million homes (CLG, 2009). Even the 900 wind turbines
that could be built with the equivalent carbon sequestered under the most-likely hemp-binder
scenario would generate enough electricity to power 4.5% of UK homes (Box 6.3).
No of homes = A x 0.3 x 8760 / 4700
Where A, 0.3 and 8760 are as Box 6.2 and 4,700 is the average UK household electricity
consumption in kWh (BWEA, 2007)
2000 x 0.3 x 8760 / 4700 = 1,118.3 homes
1,118.3 x 22,341 = 24,983,643 homes (best-case)
1,118.3 x 916 1,024,430 (most-likely)
100 / 22.2 million x 1 million = 4.5%
Box 6.3

6.4

Potential Barriers

The following sections consider some of the potential barriers to the use of hemp-binder as an
insulation material.
6.4.1 Competition
Despite the fact that very few solid wall houses have currently been insulated, external
cladding / rendering and dry lining are established techniques, and synthetic insulation
products are available for these purposes. Some manufacturers are able to demonstrate A or
even A+ overall ratings in BREs Green Guide and therefore have a strong case for marketing
the environmental credentials of their products.

N Miskin

54

The BRE Green Guide (Anderson et al, 2009) states:

The benefit of using any of the insulations listed in the green guide will outweigh the
embodied environmental impact of their manufacture, installation and end of life disposal.
Whilst it is true that the embodied carbon will be paid back by increasing the energy efficiency
of the building, this does miss a potential opportunity for advocating a method of carbon
sequestration. If a full LCA were carried out for hemp-binder to enable it to be given a Green
Guide rating, even if it achieved an A+ this would not help consumers distinguish its carbon
sequestering properties from many other synthetic materials available.
There are natural insulation products available that can be used for dry lining, some of which
also have carbon sequestration potential (such as hemp fibre, flax, wood wool, sheeps wool
and cellulose). However, these do not have the advantages of hemp-binder in terms of
monolithic construction (achieving air tightness) and thermal mass.
Hemp-binder is a fledgling technology about which there is a general lack of awareness and
for which there is currently no market. Hemp-clay particularly is still at the experimental stage,
with no evidence of examples of use in actual buildings found in the literature. Therefore the
method is not currently developed or proven sufficiently to allow it to reasonably compete with
more established products.
6.4.2 Costs
Based on current costs it is estimated that to insulate the external walls of an average house
with hemp-binder would cost around 3,425 (see Table 6.4). Considerable savings could be
made by using a clay binder and carrying out the work by DIY or using volunteers. The work
is likely to be carried out more quickly by experienced contractors (if the market develops
sufficiently for contractors to gain experience), but their hourly rate would likely be higher than
that assumed here.
Materials

Labour

Hemp / Lime material costs

2
around 11/m
at 100mm
(Based on calculations by
Rhydwen, 2009).

Labour costs could range from

nothing on a DIY job to being
substantial for a contractor.

Clay is likely to be substantially

less and may even be available
on site.

11 x 86.4m
950.40

Assume: 5.80/hour (minimum

wage; HMRC, 2009)
2

Electricity
Assume:
12.47p/kWh (EST, 2009)
Mixing 0.36 kWh/m2 and drying
1.35 kWh/m2 (based on CAT
cottage case study)

4.9 hours/m (based on CAT

cottage case study)
(4.9 x 86.4m ) x 5.80

(0.1247 x (0.36+1.35)) x
2
86.4m

2,457

18.42

Table 6.3: Estimated costs for hemp-binder (average house)

Costs for dry lining are estimated at 4,500 for materials and installation (PMR, 2009; see
Section 2.3.2), however it is not clear what assumptions have been made about labour costs
and average wall areas and therefore how this compares to the cost estimates for hempbinder. It is however likely to be easier to install hemp-binder successfully as a DIY job than
dry lining after some initial guidance on getting the mix to the right consistency and tamping to
the right density. Therefore it has greater potential to enable cost savings and should be able
to compete with dry lining in economic terms.

N Miskin

55

6.4.3 Disruption
Any form of internal wall insulation is disruptive, requiring redecoration of affected rooms.
Hemp-binder is likely to be perceived as more disruptive than dry lining, due to the wet nature
of the application and the drying time. In many situations the disruption can be minimised
through good working practices and is unlikely to be a significant problem given that
redecoration is to be carried out in any case. Applying hemp-binder during the spring /
summer could reduce the drying time and if necessary one room could be insulated at a time
to minimise disturbance to the whole house.
6.4.4 Availability of Materials
Based on government timescales, all UK homes should have undergone a whole house
energy saving package, including wall insulation by 2030 (HM Government, 2009). Therefore
assuming 7 million homes were insulated with hemp and binder over an 18 year period from
2012 to 2030 (388,888 homes per year), approximately 336,000 tonnes of hemp shiv would
be required per year. This would require 84,000 hectares of land for hemp cultivation (approx
0.48% of all UK agricultural land), see Box 6.4. In 2006, only around 5,000 hectares of land in
the UK was used for growing hemp (Bevan & Woolley, 2008).

864 kg hemp required per house (average)

Assume 6 tonnes hemp straw per hectare: 4 tonnes shiv
336,000/4 = 84,000 Ha
17,400,367 Ha = total UK agricultural land (DEFRA, 2008).
Box 6.4

In reality, not all solid wall homes will be insulated with hemp-binder and in nothing like these
numbers in the initial years from 2012, therefore the annual land area required is likely to be
much smaller than 84,000 hectares. However, if a significant hemp-binder market were to
become established there is also likely to be competition for the shiv from new build
construction. If imported hemp were used, this would have a detrimental effect on the
embodied carbon due to transport, therefore it is important that the hemp can be sourced and
processed locally.
Lime is a finite resource, but abundant in the UK (BGS, 2006) and at current levels of
consumption there is enough for many generations (Bartley, 2008). Clay is even more
abundant and available relatively locally across much of the UK. However, in the quantities
required, there would obviously be impacts associated with quarrying and loss of agricultural
land if shallow clay pits were not restored (Busbridge, 2009). Sourcing of lime and clay
therefore must be carefully managed to minimise environmental impact.

N Miskin

56

Conclusions

7.1

General

Substantial cuts in global CO2 emissions must be achieved, and ideally accompanied by
measures to sequester carbon, if atmospheric CO2 concentrations are to be kept within safe
limits. Improving the energy efficiency of homes is an important step in achieving the UKs
ambitious GHG reduction targets and reducing heat loss through walls is an area in which
large savings can be made. Solid walled houses are viewed as problematic, given that it is
disruptive and costly to insulate their walls, and conventional dry lining techniques risk future
moisture problems.
Hemp-lime is an emerging construction material, which has been successfully used in several
new developments in the UK. It appears to be well suited as an insulation material for the
renovation of solid wall buildings due to a combination of thermal mass, moisture regulating
properties and airtight finish. It should therefore provide a comfortable and healthy indoor
environment, compatible with breathable wall constructions and, to an extent, future proofed
against a warming climate. Hemp-lime is promoted as environmentally superior to many
conventional construction materials, however there are concerns over the environmental
impact associated with the lime, which have led to proposals for its replacement with a clay
binder.
This study has shown that the embodied carbon of hemp-binder varies widely depending on
the source of the hemp and the binder, however it is significantly less than the equivalent
synthetic materials used for comparison. Current practice would likely involve the use of hemp
grown in monoculture and lime from a large-scale centralised processing plant, which would
be only marginally carbon negative at best. If it were possible to source organic hemp, or
even better, hemp grown under Rhydwens minimal environmental model, and this were
combined with a clay-based binder, the carbon sequestration potential becomes much more
convincing.
If organic hemp and clay binder were to be used to insulate the walls of all the UKs
approximately 7 million solid walled dwellings, the carbon sequestered would be significant,
equivalent to the embodied carbon in over 20,000 2MW wind turbines. Realistically not all
solid walled buildings will be insulated using these materials, however the principle of finding
a sustainable solution to the problem of reducing carbon emissions is an important one. If this
philosophy adopted more widely it may be possible to find other opportunities to sequester
carbon whilst reducing our emissions, rather than releasing yet more CO2 to the atmosphere.

7.2

Limitations

7.2.1 Assumptions
Model outputs are only as good as the inputs and the findings of this study are based on a
large number of assumptions, some of which have a significant effect on the results. Where
possible, inputs have been based on case study or literature research, however for some of
the inputs, quoted figures were found to be variable or little information was available. Also,
for some scenarios there were found to be a wide range of options and within the scope of
this study it was not possible to comprehensively explore them all (for example, end of life
scenarios). Table 7.1 summarises the main assumptions made.

N Miskin

57

Assumption

Discussion

Thermal
performance
of hemp-clay

Hemp-clay has been assumed to have a thermal performance equal to

hemp-lime. Whilst initial research indicates that this may be the case it has
not yet been convincingly proven.

Haulage
distances

There are an almost infinite number of scenarios for variation in transport

distance from raw materials to processing and manufacturer to end-user. It
was not practical to consider them all, therefore reasonable average
distances have been assumed and some differences accounted for under
the best-case / worst-case scenarios.

Variability in
EE / EC

A wide variability of EE/EC values are quoted in the literature for some
materials (particularly lime). Where this was the case, the average along
with the high and low ends of the range have been modelled.

EE / EC for
Clay

The EE/EC values used for clay were based on published values for
aggregate in the absence of any specific values for clay.

Energy use for

hemp-binder
installation

In view of the lack of installations yet to be completed these figures were

based on a single case study, which may not prove to be typical. It was
assumed that the figures increased in proportion to the volume of hempbinder applied, however this may not be the case for drying.

Nitrous oxide
emissions

The estimated N2O release was based on a general figure more suited to
global estimations. This could potentially be a large under (most likely) or
overestimate.

Extent of lime
carbonation

Given the lack of consensus on this issue a wide range was assumed.

Maintenance
Scenarios

Without long-term monitoring of insulation materials in situ, it is difficult to

know how long they are likely to last and how robust they will be.
Therefore in order to reduce bias towards any material type, the same was
assumed for all.

End of Life
Scenarios

There are many potential end of life scenarios, which could have
significant effects on the overall EC. Within the scope of this study it was
not possible to explore them all, however it should be noted that if hempbinder is allowed to decompose, some of the sequestered CO2 will be
released and this was not accounted for within this study.

Performance
in use

The performance in use figures were based on an average house that has
been thermally upgraded to modern standards. However, the results may
have been different if various house sizes, heating system types and fabric
u-values had been modelled. The modelling carried out does not account
for the possibility that within 60 years, heating systems may be
predominantly electric, powered by a decarbonised grid.

EC of Wind
Farms

It could not be determined whether the EE calculations from the Elsam

(2004) LCA have been converted to a UK specific scenario. However,
given that the example was used only to put potential carbon savings into
context, it is not considered critical.
Table 7.1: Assumptions

7.2.2 Finishing Materials

The use of wall finishing materials (such as render, plaster, paint and tiles) were not included
as these would have added an excessive number of variables to the number of scenarios
considered for the scope of this study and are also likely to be replaced several times over a
60-year time period as rooms are decorated and updated. They will however have an effect
(usually fairly small) on the u-value, which was not accounted for.

N Miskin

58

7.2.3 Natural Insulation Materials

There are many other natural insulation materials available, such as hemp fibre batts, wood
wool, cellulose, etc which could have been compared with hemp-binder as well as the
synthetic examples considered. Some of these materials are also breathable and carbon
sequestering and therefore would have made an interesting comparison with hemp-binder.
However, they do not have the advantages of monolithic construction (increased air tightness)
and currently make up a very small proportion of market share. Therefore, it was decided to
contrast hemp-binder with the current conventional solutions available.
7.2.4 Floors, Roofs and Other Building Types
This study focused solely on insulting the internal surface of solid walled houses, however
hemp-binder could also be used to insulate external walls, floors and roofs in some situations.
There are also commercial, industrial and community buildings with solid walls, which would
benefit from insulation and the size of this potential market has not been considered.
7.3

Further Research

There are a number of recommendations for further research, which fall into two main
categories.
1. Recommendations specific to hemp-binder embodied energy / carbon

The extent of carbonation is a major uncertainty in the carbon sequestration potential

of hemp-binder and further research is necessary in this area to ascertain more
accurately how much CO2 is likely to be absorbed by the lime in the walls over time
and the factors affecting the carbonation process (such as moisture levels, plastering
etc).
A LCA for clay is required, to confirm (or otherwise) its positive environmental
credentials and low embodied carbon.
An exploration of the potential end of life options for hemp-binder, to include the rate
of CO2 release through composting.
Research to demonstrate how feasible it is in practice to crush and re-use hempbinder materials and the proportion of additional lime required.

2. General recommendations
Monitored examples of hemp-binder used to insulate real houses are required to
demonstrate its thermal performance in real situations. The CAT cottage case study
is one example (Rhydwen, Wright, Potter, in progress), however examples using
different wall constructions, thicknesses and hemp-binder combinations are also
required, particularly using clay, as that is where the real potential for carbon
sequestration lies.
Market research to establish more accurately the size of the potential market and
whether sufficient materials can be sourced in a sustainable manner to meet the
demand.
Potential methods of decreasing the drying time and reducing the disruption
associated with hemp-binder application should be explored, such as the use of
hemp-binder blocks, although the effect on the embodied carbon and thermal
performance would need to be determined.
Long term monitoring and accelerated aging experiments on dry lining solutions to
demonstrate their expected lifespan (particularly the vapour membrane) and potential
moisture issues, to establish whether dry lining is a viable long term solution for
insulating solid walls.

N Miskin

59

References
ADAS (2005) UK Flax and Hemp production: The impact of changes in support measures on
the competitiveness and future potential of UK fibre production and industrial use, ADAS
Centre for Sustainable Crop Management for DEFRA. Available at:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/growing/crops/industrial/pdf/flaxhemp-report.pdf (accessed
7 November 2009)
Anderson, B. (2006a) Offsetting of backstop insulation standards by incorporation of LZCT.
British Research Establishment Scotland for Scottish Building Standards Association.
Available from:
http://www.sbsa.gov.uk/archive/pdf/web%20version%20with%20cr%20updatePD%20Offsetti
ng%20backstops.pdf (accessed 6 January 2010)
Anderson, B. (2006b) Conventions for U-value Calculations, British Research Establishment
Scotland, Watford, BRE Press. Available From:
http://www.bre.co.uk/filelibrary/pdf/rpts/BR_443_(2006_Edition).pdf (accessed 15 December
2009)
Anderson, J., Shiers, D. and Steele, K. (2009) The Green Guide to Specification. An
Environmental Profiling System for Building Materials and Components. Fourth Edition.
Watford, BRE Press / Wiley Blackwell
Arup (2008) Your home in a changing climate. Report for the Three Regions Climate change
Group, London. Available from: http://www.london.gov.uk/trccg/docs/pub1.pdf (accessed 5
December 2009)
Bartley, P. (2008) Can building lime produced on a small scale be more sustainable? Thesis,
MSc. Architecture: Advanced Environmental and Energy Studies, University of East London
Berge, B. (2009) The Ecology of Building Materials Second Edition, Italy, Elsevier
Bevan, R. and Woolley, T. (2008) Hemp Lime Construction: A guide to building with hemp
lime composites Watford, BRE Press
Bevan, R. and Wooley, T. (2009) Constructing a Low Energy House from Hemcrete and
Other Natural Materials in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Nonconventional Materials and Technologies (NOMCAT 2009), Bath, UK.
BGS (2005) Mineral Planning Factsheet - Natural Hydraulic Lime. Office of the Deputy Prime
Mininster. Available from: http://www.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/free_downloads/home.html#MPF
(accessed 12 November 2009)
BGS (2006) Mineral Planning Factsheet- Limestone. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
Available from: http://www.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/free_downloads/home.html#MPF (accessed
12 November 2009)
Boardman, B. (2007) Home Truths: A low carbon strategy to reduce UK housing emissions by
80% by 2050, University of Oxfords Environmental Change Institute Research Report for
Friends of the Earth and The Co-operative Bank, ECI Research Report 34.
Bouwman, A.F. (1996) Direct Emission of Nitrous Oxide from Agricultural Soils. Nutrient
Cycling in Agroecosystems 46 pp. 53-70

N Miskin

60

BRE (1994) Thermal insulation: avoiding risks. Second edition. HMSO

BRE (2002) Final Report on the Construction of the Hemp Houses at Haverhill, Suffolk. British
Research Establishment for Suffolk Housing Society Ltd 209-717 Rev.1 Available from:
http://projects.bre.co.uk/hemphomes/ (accessed 12 November 2009)
BRE (2003) Thermographic Inspection of the Masonry and Hemp Houses Haverhill, Suffolk.
British Research Establishment for Suffolk Housing Society Ltd 21202 Available from:
http://projects.bre.co.uk/hemphomes/ (accessed 12 November 2009)
BRE (2005) Energy Use in Homes, Energy Summary report for the Energy Saving Trust and
DEFRA. Available from:
http://projects.bre.co.uk/energyuse/pdf/2001/EnergySummaryReport.pdf (accessed 17
December 2009)
BRE (2007) Methodology for Environmental Profiles of Construction Products. Available from:
http://www.bre.co.uk/filelibrary/greenguide/PDF/Environmental_Profiles_Methodology_2007__Draft.pdf (accessed 12 December 2009)
BRE (2009) Green Guide 2008 Ratings [online] Available from:
http://www.bre.co.uk/greenguide/ggelement.jsp?buildingType=Housing&category=15&parent
=0&elementType=10032 (accessed 12 January 2010)
Broadmeadow, M. & Matthews, R. (2003) Forests, Carbon and Climate Change: the UK
contribution, Forestry Commission Information Note. Available from:
www.forestresearch.gov.uk/PDF/fcin048.pdf/$file/fcin048.pdf
BRUFMA (2008) Sustainable Development [online] Available from:
www.brufma.co.uk/sustainability.htm (accessed 15 December 2009)
Busbridge, R. (2009) Hemp-Clay: An initial investigation into the thermal, structural and
environmental credentials of monolithic clay and hemp walls. Thesis, MSc. Architecture:
Advanced Environmental and Energy Studies, University of East London
BWEA (2007) Calculation for Wind Energy Statistics [online] Available from:
www.bwea.com/edu/calcs.html (accessed 21 December 2009)
BWEA (2008) Wind Energy in the UK. State of the Industry Report. Available from:
www.bwea.com/pdf/publication/SOI-report.pdf (accessed 21 December 2009)
Carbon Trust (2008) Energy and Carbon Conversions 2008 Update. Factsheet CTL018.
Available from: www.carbontrust.co.uk/publications/publicationdetail.htm?productid=CTL018
(accessed 4 December 2009)
Celotex (2009) FAQs. Available from: http://www.celotex.co.uk/Technical-Services/FurtherInformation/FAQs (accessed 10 December 2009)
Cherret, N., Barrett, J., Clemett, A., Chadwick, M. and Chadwick M.J. (2005) Ecological
Footprint and Water Analysis of Cotton, Hemp and Polyester. Report prepared for and
reviewed by BioRegional Development Group and WWF Cymru Stockholm Environment
Institute

N Miskin

61

CSE (Centre for Sustainable Energy), Association for Conservation of Energy and Moore, R.
(2008) How Low. Achieving Optimal Carbon Savings from the UKs Existing Housing Stock.
Report for World Wildlife Fund-UK.
CLG (2009) England House Condition Survey 2007 Annual Report. Communities and Local
Government. Available from:
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/pdf/1346262.pdf (accessed 30 October
2009)
Criswick, N. (2008) Insulation in the home [Online] Available from: http://www.epsomewellenergy.org.uk/page.aspx?id=6 (accessed 25 January 2010)
Coulson, R. (2009) An investigation into the thermal properties of hemp and lime walls in
dynamic heating situations with reference to steady state u-values. Thesis, MSc. Architecture:
Advanced Environmental and Energy Studies, University of East London
DECC (2009a) Digest of United Kingdom Energy Statistics (DUKES) 2009. Available from:
www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/publication/dukes/dukes.aspx (accessed 9
December 2009)
DECC (2009b) UK Climate Change Sustainable Development Indicator 2008 Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Provisional Figures. Available from:
http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/climate_change/climate_change.aspx
(accessed 18 November 2009)
DEFRA. (2007) UK Energy Efficiency Action Plan. Department for Environment Food and
Rural Affairs, PB21615. Available from:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/uk/energy/pdf/action-plan-2007.pdf
(accessed 5 October 2008)
DEFRA (2009a) Adapting to Climate Change; UK Climate Projections. Department for
Environment Food and Rural Affairs, PB13274. Available from:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climate/documents/uk-climate-projections.pdf (accessed
2 December 2009)
DEFRA (2009b) Guidelines to DEFRA / DECC GHG Conversion Factors for Company
Reporting Version 2 Available from:
www.defra.gov.uk/environment/business/reporting/pdf/20090928-guidelines-ghg-conversionfactors.pdf (accessed 21 December 2009)
DFT (2008) Road Freight Statistics 2008. [online] Available from:
www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablepublications/frieght/goodsbyroad/roadfreightstatistics20
08 (accessed 31 December 2009).
Directgov (2009) Warm Front Scheme in England [online] Available from:
www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/BenefitsTaxCreditsAndOtherSupport/On_a_low
_income/DG_10018661 (accessed 5 January 2010)
DTI (2006) The Energy Challenge Energy Review, A Report. Department for Trade and
Industry, 31890. Available from: http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file31890.pdf (accessed 8
January 2009)
Elsam (2004) Life Cycle assessment of onshore and offshore sited wind farms. Danish
Energy Authority and Vestas Wind Systems, 200128. Available from:
N Miskin

62

http://www.vestas.com/Files/Filer/EN/Sustainability/LCA/LCA_V80_2004_uk.pdf (accessed 13
January 2010)
EST (2006a) External Insulation for Dwellings. Energy Saving Trust GPG293. Available from:
http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/business/Global-Data/Publications/External-insulationsystems-for-walls-of-dwellings-CE118-GPG293 (accessed 10 January 2010)
EST (2006b) Practical Refurbishment of Solid-Walled Houses. Energy Saving Trust CE184.
Available from: http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/business/GlobalData/Publications/Practical-refurbishment-of-solid-walled-houses-CE184 (accessed 10
January 2010)
EST (2009) Solid Wall Insulation [online] Available from:
http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/Home-improvements-and-products/Home-insulationglazing/Solid-wall-insulation (accessed 8 October 2009)
EST (2009) An Introduction to Insulating your Home Energy Saving Trust EE 156 Available
from: http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/Publication-Download/?oid=594360&aid=2164086
(accessed 6 January 2010)
EST (2009) Energy Saving Assumptions [online] http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/Energysaving-assumptions
Evrard, A and De Herde, A. (2006) Dynamical interactions between heat and mass flows in
Lime-Hemp Concrete in Research in Building Physics and Building Engineering, London,
Taylor & Francis Group
Givoni, B. (1998) Climate Consideration in Building and Urban Design, USA, John Wiley &
Sons Inc.
Greenspec (2009a) Insulation derived from Organic sources [online]. Available from:
http://www.greenspec.co.uk/html/materials/insulation-organic.html#hempcrete (accessed 12
December 2009)
Greenspec (2009b) L681 Thermal Insulation [online]. Available from:
http://www.greenspec.co.uk/html/products/list681a.html (accessed 12 December 2009)
Greenspec (2009c) Insulation Materials - Introduction [online]. Available from:
http://www.greenspec.co.uk/html/materials/insulation.html (accessed 12 December 2009)
Greenspec (2009d) Expanded Polystyrene [online] Available from:
http://www.greenspec.co.uk/html/materials/insulation-oil_derived.html#eps (accessed 12
December 2009)
Hartman, H. (2009) Specifying Natural Insulation. The Architects Journal [online article, 26
February 2009]. Available from: http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/sustainability/sustainabledevelopment/specifying-natural-insulation/1994354.article (accessed 10 November 2009)
Helweg-Larsen, T. & Bull, J. (2007) Zero Carbon Britain. An alternative energy strategy.
Centre for Alternative Technology, Machynlleth, CAT Publications.
Hutton, T. (2004) Condensation. The Building Conservation Directory 2004, Wiltshire,
Cathedral Communications Ltd

N Miskin

63

HM Government (2009) The UK Low Carbon Transition Plan National Strategy for Climate
and Energy. Norwich, TSO. Available From:
http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/publications/lc_trans_plan/lc_trans_plan.aspx
(accessed 21 November 2009)
HMRC (2009) HM Revenue & Customs National Minimum Wage [online] Available From:
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/nmw/ (accessed 11 January 2010)
HM Treasury (2009). Budget 2009, Chapter 7. Available from: http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/d/Budget2009/bud09_chapter7_193.pdf (accessed 4 May 2009)
Hammond, G. and Jones, C. (2008) Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE) version 1.6a.
Sustainable Energy Research Team, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of
Bath, UK. Available from: www.bath.ac.uk/mech-eng/sert/embodied (accessed 12 July 2009)
Holmes, S. (2009) Lecture: Building Limes and Cement. AEES Module C3 Study Book, May
2009 pp 211-221
IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working
Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
Kingspan (2008) End of Life Solutions for Kingspan Insulated Panels. Available at:
www.kingspan.com (accessed 15 December 2009)
Knauf (2009) DriTherm Cavity Slab. [online] Available from: http://www.knaufinsulation.co.uk/dritherm-cavity-slab.html (accessed 4 December 2009).
Kymalainen, H. and Sjoberg, A. (2008) Flax and Hemp Fibres as Raw Materials for Thermal
Insulations. Building and Environment 43 pp1261-1269
Lhoist (2009) Renders / plasters [online] Available from:
http://www.lhoist.co.uk/tradical/pdf/renders--plasters.pdf (accessed 22 November 2009)
MacMullan, R. (2007) Environmental Science in Building. 6th Edition Palgrove Macmillan
McKay, D. (2009) Sustainable Energy Without the Hot Air, Available from:
www.withouthotair.com (accessed 30 October 2009)
Murphy, R.J. and Norton, A. (2008) Life Cycle Assessments of Natural Fibre Insulation
Materials Final Report for National Non Food Crops Centre and DEFRA
ODPM (2006) The Building Regulations 2000 Approved Document L1B Conservation of Fuel
and Power in Existing Buildings
www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/br/BR_PDF_ADL1B_2006.pdf
Pervaiz, M and Sain, M.M. (2003) Carbon Storage Potential in Natural Fibre Composites.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling 39 pp325-340

N Miskin

64

Pett, J. (2001) Affordable Warmth for Hard to Treat Homes: Finding a Way Forward?
Association for the Conservation of Energy Discussion Paper DP06. Available from:
http://www.ukace.org/publications/ACE%20Discussion%20Paper%20(2001-11)%20%20Affordable%20Warmth%20for%20'Hard%20to%20Heat'%20Homes (accessed 29
October 2009)
POST (2006) Carbon Footprint of Electricity Generation postnote number 268 Parliamentary
Office of Science and Technology Available from: (accessed 19 December 2009)
PMR (2008) UK Domestic Solid Wall Insulation Sector Profile Executive Summary, Purple
Market Research Ltd for Energy Saving Trust and Energy Efficiency Partnership for Homes
PMR (2009) Solid Wall Insulation Supply Chain Review Purple Market Research Ltd for
Energy Saving Trust and Energy Efficiency Partnership for Homes. Available from:
(http://www.eeph.org.uk/uploads/documents/partnership/SWI%20supply%20chain%20review
%208%20May%2020091.pdf (accessed 10 November 2009)
Roaf, S., Baker, K and Peacock, A. (2008) Evidence on Tackling Hard to Treat Properties
Scottish Government Social Research
Roberts, S. (2008) Altering Existing Buildings in the UK. Energy Policy 36 pp4482-4486
Rockstrom, J. (2009) A Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Nature 461 pp472-475
Rockwool (2009a) What is stone wool? [online] Available from:
http://www.rockwool.co.uk/about+rockwool/what+is+stone+wool-c7- (accessed 2 November
2009)
Rockwool (2009b) The Recycling Procedure [online] Available from:
http://www.rockwool.co.uk/sustainability/reduce,+reuse,+recycle/recycle/the+recycling+proce
dure (accessed 30 December 2009)
Rhydwen, G. R. (2006) A model for UK hemp cultivation and processing to supply the building
industry with hurds for hemp and lime concrete and fibres for insulation bats, with the ethos of
environmental protection as a priority. Thesis, MSc. Architecture: Advanced Environmental
and Energy Studies, University of East London
Rhydwen, R. (2009a) Lecture: Hemp / Lime (1a) History and Background to hemp (Cannabis
Sativa L.) AEES Module C3 Study Book, May 2009 pp85-103
Rhydwen, R (2009b) Lecture: Hemp / Lime (1b) Building with hemp and lime AEES Module
C3 Study Book, May 2009 pp103-127
Ronchetti, P. (2007) The barriers to the mainstreaming of lime-hemp: A systemic approach.
Thesis, MSc. Sustainable Development, Dublin Institute of Technology
Scottish Government (2008) Planning Advice Note 84 Reducing Carbon Emissions in New
Development. Available from: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/214728/0057273.pdf
(accessed 12 January 2010)
Scottish Government (2009) Community Renewable Energy Toolkit Part 4, Section 2: Energy
Efficient Buildings [online] Available from:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/03/20155542/4 (accessed 20 November 2009)
N Miskin

65

Schneider, B. and Schneider, R. (2010) Global Warmth with little extra CO2. Nature
Geoscience 3 pp 6-7
SEDA (2006) Design and detailing for airtightness. Scottish Ecological Design Association
Design Guide for Scotland. Available from: seda2.org/dfa/dfa-2.pdf (accessed 20 December
2009)
Smith, R. (2006) Parity Projects Sustainable Renovation Newsletter- October / November
2006. Available from: www.parityprojects.com/Parity-Projects-Newsletter-Oct-Nov-2006.pdf
(accessed 6 December 2009).
Springvale (2008) Why EPS? [online] Available from: www.springvale.com/pageview3.asp?InfoID=567
Thomas, A.R., Williams, G. and Ashurt, N. (1992) The control of damp in old buildings.
Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings Technical Pamphlet 8
Thompson, M. (2000) Condensation and Breathing Walls AEES Module A3 Study Book,
November 2008 pp 38-74
Toman, J., Vimmrola, A. and Cerny, R. (2009) Long-term on-site assessment of hydrothermal
performance of interior thermal insulation systems without water vapour barrier. Energy and
Buildings 41 pp 51-55
Lhoist (2008) Building Lime Innovation Hemp Lime Technology. Information pack Lhoist UK
Available from: http://www.lhoist.co.uk/tradical/information-pack.html (accessed 2 September
2009)
UK Agriculture (2008) Farming Statistics [online]
http://www.ukagriculture.com/statistics/farming_statistics.cfm?strsection=Land%20Use
Walker, M. (2009) Hemp-lime: Internal insulation for solid walls. Thesis, MSc. Architecture:
Advanced Environmental and Energy Studies, University of East London
Wilkinson, S. (2009) A study of the moisture buffering potential of hemp in combination with
lime and clay based binders. Thesis, MSc. Architecture: Advanced Environmental and Energy
Studies, University of East London
WRAP (2006) Choosing Construction Products: Guide to the Recycled Content of
mainstream Construction Products Available from:
www.envirowise.gov.uk/media/attachments/244130/WRAP%20%20choosing%20construction%20products.pdf (accessed 3 January 2010)
Woolley, T. (2009) Lecture: Sustainable Building Materials (3) - Sustainable Insulation
Materials. AEES Lecture Notes pp 197-210

N Miskin

66

Appendix 1
NHER Output Sheets

Insulation required for 0.35 Wm2K u-value

(EPS, PUR, Mineral Wool and Hemp-binder)

U-value for insulation thickness of 100mm

(EPS, PUR, Mineral Wool and Hemp-binder)

Data inputs for building CO2 emissions

(EPS, PUR, Mineral Wool and Hemp-binder)

N Miskin

67







7KLFNQHVV
PP

8YDOXH5RXQGHG

8YDOXH&RUUHFWHG

8YDOXH





3DJHRI


:P.

:P.





$LUJDSVZLWKQRDLUFLUFXODWLRQ
$LUJDSVZLWKQRDLUFLUFXODWLRQ

$LU*DS
&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO$LUJDS&RUUHFWLRQ




/D\HU
,QGH[

8YDOXH$LU*DSV&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO)DVWHQLQJ&RUUHFWLRQ

8YDOXH)L[LQJV&RUUHFWLRQV

,QWHULP8YDOXH

,QWHULP8YDOXH



6ODWH
&DYLW\XQYHQWLODWHG
3RO\HWK\OHQHSRO\WKHQHORZGHQVLW\SODVWLF
(36ERDUG
6WDQGDUGZDOOERDUGXSWRNJP

7RWDO7KLFNQHVV 







/D\HU
,QGH[

0DWHULDO1DPH

&RQGXFWLYLW\
:P.



8YDOXH&DOFXODWRU9










8SSHU5HVLVWDQFH







5HVLVWDQFH

P.:

/RZHU5HVLVWDQFH







)UDFWLRQ







7KLFNQHVV
PP

8YDOXH5RXQGHG

8YDOXH&RUUHFWHG

8YDOXH











$LUJDSVZLWKQRDLUFLUFXODWLRQ
$LUJDSVZLWKQRDLUFLUFXODWLRQ

$LU*DS
&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO$LUJDS&RUUHFWLRQ




/D\HU
,QGH[

8YDOXH$LU*DSV&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO)DVWHQLQJ&RUUHFWLRQ

8YDOXH)L[LQJV&RUUHFWLRQV

,QWHULP8YDOXH

,QWHULP8YDOXH

0DWHULDO1DPH

%6(1,62

6ROLGZDOO

3DJHRI


:P.


:P.

6ODWH
&DYLW\XQYHQWLODWHG
3RO\HWK\OHQHSRO\WKHQHORZGHQVLW\SODVWLF
38IRDPERDUG
6WDQGDUGZDOOERDUGXSWRNJP

7RWDO7KLFNQHVV 







/D\HU
,QGH[

&RQVWUXFWLRQ'HWDLOV

6WDQGDUG8YDOXH

%6(1,62

&RQVWUXFWLRQ'HWDLOV

(OHPHQW7\SH

6ROLGZDOO

1+(5

6WDQGDUG8YDOXH

8YDOXH&RQVWUXFWLRQ

(OHPHQW7\SH

1+(5







)UDFWLRQ

/RZHU5HVLVWDQFH

8SSHU5HVLVWDQFH







&RQGXFWLYLW\
:P.

8YDOXH&DOFXODWRU9












5HVLVWDQFH

P.:

8YDOXH&RQVWUXFWLRQ







7KLFNQHVV
PP

8YDOXH5RXQGHG

8YDOXH&RUUHFWHG

8YDOXH





3DJHRI


:P.

:P.





$LUJDSVZLWKQRDLUFLUFXODWLRQ
$LUJDSVZLWKQRDLUFLUFXODWLRQ

$LU*DS
&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO$LUJDS&RUUHFWLRQ




/D\HU
,QGH[

8YDOXH$LU*DSV&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO)DVWHQLQJ&RUUHFWLRQ

8YDOXH)L[LQJV&RUUHFWLRQV

,QWHULP8YDOXH

,QWHULP8YDOXH



6ODWH
&DYLW\XQYHQWLODWHG
3RO\HWK\OHQHSRO\WKHQHORZGHQVLW\SODVWLF
0LQHUDOZRROEDWW
6WDQGDUGZDOOERDUGXSWRNJP

7RWDO7KLFNQHVV 







/D\HU
,QGH[

0DWHULDO1DPH

&RQGXFWLYLW\
:P.

8YDOXH&DOFXODWRU9




/RZHU5HVLVWDQFH














5HVLVWDQFH

P.:

8SSHU5HVLVWDQFH







)UDFWLRQ




7KLFNQHVV
PP

8YDOXH5RXQGHG

8YDOXH&RUUHFWHG

8YDOXH

7RWDO$LUJDS&RUUHFWLRQ

8YDOXH$LU*DSV&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO)DVWHQLQJ&RUUHFWLRQ

8YDOXH)L[LQJV&RUUHFWLRQV

,QWHULP8YDOXH

,QWHULP8YDOXH

0DWHULDO1DPH



3DJHRI


:P.

:P.









%6(1,62

6ROLGZDOO

6ODWH
+HPSELQGHU

7RWDO7KLFNQHVV 




/D\HU
,QGH[

&RQVWUXFWLRQ'HWDLOV

6WDQGDUG8YDOXH

%6(1,62

&RQVWUXFWLRQ'HWDLOV

(OHPHQW7\SH

6ROLGZDOO

1+(5

6WDQGDUG8YDOXH

8YDOXH&RQVWUXFWLRQ

(OHPHQW7\SH

1+(5



8YDOXH&DOFXODWRU9







5HVLVWDQFH

P.:

8SSHU5HVLVWDQFH




)UDFWLRQ

/RZHU5HVLVWDQFH




&RQGXFWLYLW\
:P.

8YDOXH&RQVWUXFWLRQ







7KLFNQHVV
PP

8YDOXH5RXQGHG

8YDOXH&RUUHFWHG

8YDOXH





3DJHRI


:P.

:P.





$LUJDSVZLWKQRDLUFLUFXODWLRQ

$LU*DS
&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO$LUJDS&RUUHFWLRQ

/D\HU
,QGH[

8YDOXH$LU*DSV&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO)DVWHQLQJ&RUUHFWLRQ

8YDOXH)L[LQJV&RUUHFWLRQV

,QWHULP8YDOXH

,QWHULP8YDOXH



6ODWH
&DYLW\XQYHQWLODWHG
3RO\HWK\OHQHSRO\WKHQHORZGHQVLW\SODVWLF
(36ERDUG
6WDQGDUGZDOOERDUGXSWRNJP

7RWDO7KLFNQHVV 







/D\HU
,QGH[

0DWHULDO1DPH

&RQGXFWLYLW\
:P.



8YDOXH&DOFXODWRU9










8SSHU5HVLVWDQFH







5HVLVWDQFH

P.:

/RZHU5HVLVWDQFH







)UDFWLRQ







7KLFNQHVV
PP

8YDOXH5RXQGHG

8YDOXH&RUUHFWHG

8YDOXH











$LUJDSVZLWKQRDLUFLUFXODWLRQ

$LU*DS
&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO$LUJDS&RUUHFWLRQ

/D\HU
,QGH[

8YDOXH$LU*DSV&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO)DVWHQLQJ&RUUHFWLRQ

8YDOXH)L[LQJV&RUUHFWLRQV

,QWHULP8YDOXH

,QWHULP8YDOXH

0DWHULDO1DPH

%6(1,62

6ROLGZDOO

3DJHRI


:P.


:P.

6ODWH
&DYLW\XQYHQWLODWHG
3RO\HWK\OHQHSRO\WKHQHORZGHQVLW\SODVWLF
38IRDPERDUG
6WDQGDUGZDOOERDUGXSWRNJP

7RWDO7KLFNQHVV 







/D\HU
,QGH[

&RQVWUXFWLRQ'HWDLOV

6WDQGDUG8YDOXH

%6(1,62

&RQVWUXFWLRQ'HWDLOV

(OHPHQW7\SH

6ROLGZDOO

1+(5

6WDQGDUG8YDOXH

8YDOXH&RQVWUXFWLRQ

(OHPHQW7\SH

1+(5







)UDFWLRQ

/RZHU5HVLVWDQFH

8SSHU5HVLVWDQFH







&RQGXFWLYLW\
:P.

8YDOXH&DOFXODWRU9












5HVLVWDQFH

P.:

8YDOXH&RQVWUXFWLRQ







7KLFNQHVV
PP

8YDOXH5RXQGHG

8YDOXH&RUUHFWHG

8YDOXH





3DJHRI


:P.

:P.





$LUJDSVZLWKQRDLUFLUFXODWLRQ
$LUJDSVZLWKQRDLUFLUFXODWLRQ

$LU*DS
&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO$LUJDS&RUUHFWLRQ




/D\HU
,QGH[

8YDOXH$LU*DSV&RUUHFWLRQV

7RWDO)DVWHQLQJ&RUUHFWLRQ

8YDOXH)L[LQJV&RUUHFWLRQV

,QWHULP8YDOXH

,QWHULP8YDOXH



6ODWH
&DYLW\XQYHQWLODWHG
3RO\HWK\OHQHSRO\WKHQHORZGHQVLW\SODVWLF
0LQHUDOZRROEDWW
6WDQGDUGZDOOERDUGXSWRNJP

7RWDO7KLFNQHVV 







/D\HU
,QGH[

0DWHULDO1DPH

&RQGXFWLYLW\
:P.



8YDOXH&DOFXODWRU9










8SSHU5HVLVWDQFH







5HVLVWDQFH

P.:

/RZHU5HVLVWDQFH







)UDFWLRQ







7KLFNQHVV
PP





8YDOXH5RXQGHG

8YDOXH&RUUHFWHG

8YDOXH

7RWDO$LUJDS&RUUHFWLRQ



3DJHRI


:P.

:P.





8YDOXH$LU*DSV&RUUHFWLRQV

$LUJDSVZLWKQRDLUFLUFXODWLRQ

7RWDO)DVWHQLQJ&RUUHFWLRQ

8YDOXH)L[LQJV&RUUHFWLRQV

,QWHULP8YDOXH

,QWHULP8YDOXH

0DWHULDO1DPH

%6(1,62

6ROLGZDOO

6ODWH
&DYLW\XQYHQWLODWHG
3RO\HWK\OHQHSRO\WKHQHORZGHQVLW\SODVWLF
+HPSELQGHU
6WDQGDUGZDOOERDUGXSWRNJP

7RWDO7KLFNQHVV 







/D\HU
,QGH[

&RQVWUXFWLRQ'HWDLOV

6WDQGDUG8YDOXH

%6(1,62

&RQVWUXFWLRQ'HWDLOV

(OHPHQW7\SH

6ROLGZDOO

1+(5

6WDQGDUG8YDOXH

8YDOXH&RQVWUXFWLRQ

(OHPHQW7\SH

1+(5







)UDFWLRQ

/RZHU5HVLVWDQFH

8SSHU5HVLVWDQFH







&RQGXFWLYLW\
:P.

8YDOXH&DOFXODWRU9












5HVLVWDQFH

P.:

8YDOXH&RQVWUXFWLRQ

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

0UV1DRPL0LVNLQ

(36,QVXODWLRQ7KH6WUHHW7KH7RZQ

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU



7RWDOIORRUDUHDDDDDEGIK






1XPEHURIRSHQIOXHV

1XPEHURILQWHUPLWWHQWIDQVRUSDVVLYHYHQWV

1XPEHURIIOXHOHVVJDVILUHV
















 





>  @



3DJHRI

6$3:RUNVKHHW9HUVLRQ

85110LVNLQ9
3ODQ$VVHVVRU9

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

T 
,IEDVHGRQDLUSHUPHDELOLW\YDOXHWKHQ>@
LQER[RWKHUZLVH 
$LUSHUPHDELOLW\YDOXHDSSOLHVLIDSUHVVXULVDWLRQWHVWKDVEHHQGRQHRUWKHGHVLJQDLUSHUPHDELOLW\LVEHLQJXVHG

,QILOWUDWLRQUDWH

:LQGRZLQILOWUDWLRQ

(QWHULQER[ IRUQHZGZHOOLQJVZKLFKDUHWRFRPSO\ZLWK%XLOGLQJ5HJXODWLRQV

3HUFHQWDJHRIZLQGRZVDQGGRRUVGUDXJKWVWULSSHG








 

+HDWORVVFRHIILFLHQW:.
+HDWORVVSDUDPHWHU+/3:P.







3DJHRI

6$3:RUNVKHHW9HUVLRQ

85110LVNLQ9
3ODQ$VVHVVRU9

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

'LVWULEXWLRQORVVIURP7DEOHFROXPQF
,ILQVWDQWDQHRXVZDWHUKHDWLQJDWSRLQWRIXVHHQWHULQER[HV WR
)RUFRPPXQLW\KHDWLQJXVH7DEOHFZKHWKHURUQRWKRWZDWHUWDQNLVSUHVHQW

(QHUJ\FRQWHQWRIKRWZDWHUXVHGIURP7DEOHFROXPQE







:DWHUKHDWLQJHQHUJ\UHTXLUHPHQWN:K\HDU






  



















E

D



E

D







9HQWLODWLRQKHDWORVV





,IQRGUDXJKWOREE\HQWHUHOVHHQWHU















$;8:.





1$

1$

1$

1$

1$





7RWDOIDEULFKHDWORVV



DEDD



>@ 

,IVXVSHQGHGZRRGHQIORRUHQWHUXQVHDOHGRUVHDOHGHOVHHQWHU

$GGLWLRQDOLQILOWUDWLRQ

7KHUPDOEULGJHV O[ FDOFXODWHGXVLQJ$SSHQGL[.
LIGHWDLOVRIWKHUPDOEULGJLQJDUHQRWNQRZQFDOFXODWH\ >VHH$SSHQGL[.@DQGHQWHULQER[

 IRUZLQGRZVDQGURRIOLJKWVXVHHIIHFWLYHZLQGRZ8YDOXHFDOFXODWHGDVJLYHQLQSDUDJUDSK

7RWDODUHDRIHOHPHQWV $P

5RRI









8YDOXH

@







*URXQG)ORRU





'RRUV

:DOOV



(/(0(17
:LQGRZV

$UHDP

G,IQDWXUDOYHQWLODWLRQRUZKROHKRXVHSRVLWLYHLQSXWYHQWLODWLRQIURPORIW
LI  WKHQ RWKHUZLVH >
(IIHFWLYHDLUFKDQJHUDWHHQWHU RUD RUE RU LQER[

D

E





D

F,IZKROHKRXVHH[WUDFWYHQWLODWLRQRUSRVLWLYHLQSXWYHQWLODWLRQIURPRXWVLGH
LI  WKHQE RWKHUZLVHE 

E,IEDODQFHGZKROHKRXVHPHFKDQLFDOYHQWLODWLRQZLWKRXWKHDWUHFRYHU\

+HDWORVVHVDQGKHDWORVVSDUDPHWHU



DLUWKURXJKSXWDFK



> @

6WUXFWXUDOLQILOWUDWLRQ IRUVWHHORUWLPEHUIUDPHRU IRUPDVRQU\FRQVWUXFWLRQ

ER[

$LUFKDQJHVSHUKRXU

HIILFLHQF\LQDOORZLQJIRULQXVHIDFWRU

D,IEDODQFHGZKROHKRXVHPHFKDQLFDOYHQWLODWLRQZLWKKHDWUHFRYHU\

,IEDODQFHGZLWKKHDWUHFRYHU\

,IEDODQFHGZKROHKRXVHPHFKDQLFDOYHQWLODWLRQV\VWHP

&DOFXODWHHIIHFWLYHDLUFKDQJHUDWHIRUWKHDSSOLFDEOHFDVH

$GMXVWHGLQILOWUDWLRQUDWH

6KHOWHUIDFWRU

1XPEHURIVLGHVRQZKLFKVKHOWHUHG
(QWHULQER[ IRUQHZGZHOOLQJVZKHUHORFDWLRQLVQRWVKRZQ

)DEULFKHDWORVV:.



D



$VVHVVRU1XPEHU







PSHUKRXU





9ROXPH
P

0UV1DRPL0LVNLQ

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG 

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5



1XPEHURIVWRUH\VLQWKHGZHOOLQJ

,IDSUHVVXULVDWLRQWHVWKDVEHHQFDUULHGRXW SURFHHGWRER[ 

,QILOWUDWLRQGXHWRFKLPQH\VIOXHVDQGIDQV D



$YHUDJHVWRUH\
KHLJKWP

FHJL 



D

1XPEHURIFKLPQH\V

9HQWLODWLRQUDWH

'ZHOOLQJYROXPH



$UHDP

*URXQG)ORRU

2YHUDOOGZHOOLQJGLPHQVLRQV

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$GGUHVV

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG

&OLHQW

$VVHVVRU1DPH

7KLV'HVLJQVXEPLVVLRQKDVEHHQFDUULHGRXWE\DQ$XWKRULVHG6$3$VVHVVRU ,WKDVEHHQSUHSDUHGIURPSODQVDQG
VSHFLILFDWLRQVDQGPD\QRWUHIOHFWWKHSURSHUW\DVFRQVWUXFWHG

1+(5

0UV1DRPL0LVNLQ

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG 

 D 







E

D







3DJHRI

6$3:RUNVKHHW9HUVLRQ

85110LVNLQ9
3ODQ$VVHVVRU9

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO





:DWHUKHDWLQJ
ED



$GGLWLRQDOJDLQVIURP7DEOHD

7RWDOLQWHUQDOJDLQV



5HGXFWLRQRILQWHUQDOJDLQVGXHWRORZHQHUJ\OLJKWLQJFDOFXODWHGLQ$SSHQGL[/





:DWWV



/LJKWVDSSOLDQFHVFRRNLQJDQGPHWDEROLF7DEOH

,QWHUQDOJDLQV

+HDWJDLQVIURPZDWHUKHDWLQJ
 >@ >@
LQFOXGH LQFDOFXODWLRQRI  RQO\LIF\OLQGHULVLQWKHGZHOOLQJRUKRWZDWHULVIURPFRPPXQLW\KHDWLQJ







2XWSXWIURPZDWHUKHDWHUN:K\HDU







6RODU'+:LQSXWFDOFXODWHGXVLQJ$SSHQGL[+HQWHULIQRVRODUFROOHFWRU



&RPELORVVIURP7DEOHDHQWHULIQRFRPELERLOHU

3ULPDU\FLUFXLWORVVIURP7DEOH





,IF\OLQGHUFRQWDLQVGHGLFDWHGVRODUVWRUDJHER[ 

>+@HOVH 





E





(QWHU RU  LQER[

  D E 



(QHUJ\ORVWIURPZDWHUVWRUDJHN:K\HDU

7HPSHUDWXUHIDFWRUIURP7DEOHE

D











1$



D



1$

1$

9ROXPHIDFWRUIURP7DEOHD

+RWZDWHUVWRUDJHORVVIDFWRUIURP7DEOHN:KOLWUHGD\
,IFRPPXQLW\KHDWLQJDQGQRWDQNLQGZHOOLQJXVHF\OLQGHUORVVIURP7DEOH IRUPPIDFWRU\LQVXODWLRQLQER[

&\OLQGHUYROXPHOLWUHVLQFOXGLQJDQ\VRODUVWRUDJHZLWKLQVDPHF\OLQGHU

,IFRPPXQLW\KHDWLQJDQGQRWDQNLQGZHOOLQJHQWHUOLWUHVLQER[
2WKHUZLVHLIQRVWRUHGKRWZDWHUWKLVLQFOXGHVLQVWDQWDQHRXVFRPELERLOHUVHQWHU

LQER[

E,IPDQXIDFWXUHU
VGHFODUHGF\OLQGHUORVVIDFWRULVQRWNQRZQ

(QHUJ\ORVWIURPZDWHUVWRUDJHN:K\HDU

7HPSHUDWXUHIDFWRUIURP7DEOHE

D,IPDQXIDFWXUHU
VGHFODUHGORVVIDFWRULVNQRZQN:KGD\

:DWHUVWRUDJHORVV

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5
0UV1DRPL0LVNLQ

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG 



6RXWK








$UHD
P









)OX[
7DEOHD




[[



[[
[[



[[

J
7DEOHE

































3DJHRI

6$3:RUNVKHHW9HUVLRQ

85110LVNLQ9
3ODQ$VVHVVRU9

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

)RUUDQJHFRRNHUERLOHUVZKHUHHIILFLHQF\LVREWDLQHGIURPWKH%RLOHU(IILFLHQF\'DWDEDVHRUPDQXIDFWXUHU
VGHFODUHGYDOXHPXOWLSO\WKH

6SDFHKHDWLQJUHTXLUHPHQWXVHIXON:K\HDU

6SDFHKHDWLQJUHTXLUHPHQWV
 


'HJUHHGD\VXVHER[ DQG7DEOH

 
%DVHWHPSHUDWXUH

@ 




 >




OLYLQJURRPDUHD 

7HPSHUDWXUHULVHIURPJDLQV

'HJUHHGD\V

0HDQLQWHUQDOWHPSHUDWXUH

5HVWRIKRXVHIUDFWLRQ

/LYLQJDUHDIUDFWLRQWR

7HPSHUDWXUHGLIIHUHQFHEHWZHHQ]RQHV7DEOH









$GMXVWPHQWIRUJDLQV
5LVREWDLQHGIURPWKH
UHVSRQVLYHQHVV
FROXPQRI7DEOHDRU7DEOHG
$GMXVWHGOLYLQJURRPWHPSHUDWXUH
























&



















*DLQV
:

7HPSHUDWXUHDGMXVWPHQWIURP7DEOHHZKHUHDSSURSULDWH
^> @`  5



 



>@









))
7DEOHF

0HDQLQWHUQDOWHPSHUDWXUHRIWKHOLYLQJDUHD7DEOH

0HDQLQWHUQDOWHPSHUDWXUH 

8VHIXOJDLQV:

8WLOLVDWLRQIDFWRU7DEOHXVLQJ*/5LQER[ 

*DLQORVVUDWLR*/5

7RWDOJDLQV:

1RWH IRUQHZGZHOOLQJVZKHUHRYHUVKDGLQJLVQRWNQRZQWKHVRODUDFFHVVIDFWRULV


7RWDOVRODUJDLQV





1RUWK



(DVW

$FFHVV
IDFWRU
7DEOHG

:HVW

6RODUJDLQV

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5

0UV1DRPL0LVNLQ

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG 





(IILFLHQF\RIPDLQKHDWLQJV\VWHP

  

>@  

D




1$









PHFKDQLFDOYHQWLODWLRQEDODQFHGH[WUDFWRUSRVLWLYHLQSXWIURPRXWVLGH7DEOHI

PDLQWDLQLQJNHHSKRWIDFLOLW\IRUJDVFRPELERLOHU7DEOHI

SXPSIRUVRODUZDWHUKHDWLQJ7DEOHI

D

)XHOSULFH
1$





 

 

 

D







)XHOFRVW
\HDU














D

3DJHRI

6$3:RUNVKHHW9HUVLRQ

85110LVNLQ9
3ODQ$VVHVVRU9

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

2QSHDNFRVW

2IISHDNIUDFWLRQ

2QSHDNIUDFWLRQ7DEOHRU$SSHQGL[)IRUHOHFWULF&368V

:DWHUKHDWLQJFRVWHOHFWULFRIISHDNWDULII



1$

D

6SDFHKHDWLQJVHFRQGDU\





6SDFHKHDWLQJPDLQV\VWHP

)XHOSULFH
7DEOH

)XHO
N:K\HDU


:DWHUKHDWLQJ

I

H

G

F

E

DEFGHI



ZDUPDLUKHDWLQJV\VWHPIDQV7DEOHI

7RWDOHOHFWULFLW\IRUWKHDERYHHTXLSPHQWN:K\HDU
D)XHOFRVWVLQGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHPV





D



N:K\HDU



HDFKERLOHUZLWKDIDQDVVLVWHGIOXH7DEOHI

HDFKFHQWUDOKHDWLQJSXPS7DEOHI

(OHFWULFLW\IRUSXPSVDQGIDQV

(QHUJ\UHTXLUHGIRUZDWHUKHDWLQJN:K\HDU

(IILFLHQF\RIZDWHUKHDWHU


6('%8.RUIURP7DEOHDRUEDGMXVWHGZKHUHDSSURSULDWHE\WKHDPRXQWVKRZQLQWKH
HIILFLHQF\DGMXVWPHQW
FROXPQRI7DEOHF

:DWHUKHDWLQJ

6SDFHKHDWLQJIXHOVHFRQGDU\N:K\HDU

6SDFHKHDWLQJIXHOPDLQUHTXLUHPHQWN:K\HDU

(IILFLHQF\RIVHFRQGDU\VXSSOHPHQWDU\KHDWLQJV\VWHPXVHYDOXHIURP7DEOHDRU$SSHQGL[(

6('%8.RUIURP7DEOHDRUEDGMXVWHGZKHUHDSSURSULDWHE\WKHDPRXQWVKRZQLQWKH
HIILFLHQF\DGMXVWPHQW
FROXPQRI7DEOHF





)UDFWLRQRIKHDWIURPVHFRQGDU\VXSSOHPHQWDU\V\VWHPXVHYDOXHIURP7DEOH7DEOHDRU$SSHQGL[)

6SDFHKHDWLQJ

D(QHUJ\UHTXLUHPHQWVLQGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHPVLQFOXGLQJPLFUR&+3
1RWHZKHQVSDFHDQGZDWHUKHDWLQJLVSURYLGHGE\FRPPXQLW\KHDWLQJXVHWKHDOWHUQDWLYHZRUNVKHHWE

UHVXOWLQER[E\ FDVH ZDWHUZKHUH FDVHLVWKHKHDWHPLVVLRQIURPWKHFDVHRIWKHUDQJHFRRNHUDWIXOOORDGLQN:DQG ZDWHULV
WKHKHDWWUDQVIHUUHGWRZDWHUDWIXOOORDGLQN:  FDVHDQG ZDWHUDUHREWDLQHGIURPWKHGDWDEDVHUHFRUGIRUWKHUDQJHFRRNHUERLOHURU
PDQXIDFWXUHU
VGHFODUHGYDOXH

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5
0UV1DRPL0LVNLQ

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG 

1$

V

V



1$

1$

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

&



1$



1$



(PLVVLRQIDFWRU
NJ&2N:K

1$







(PLVVLRQV
NJ&2\HDU

















VD

VD

D

F

E

D







E

D

3DJHRI

6$3:RUNVKHHW9HUVLRQ

85110LVNLQ9
3ODQ$VVHVVRU9

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

1$



(QHUJ\IRUZDWHUKHDWLQJIURPER[D
(QHUJ\IRUZDWHUKHDWLQJ RU>E  @

1$



(QHUJ\
N:K\HDU

6SDFHKHDWLQJVHFRQGDU\IURPER[D

6SDFHKHDWLQJPDLQIURPER[

,QGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHP

D&DUERQGLR[LGHHPLVVLRQVUDWHIRULQGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHPV LQFOXGLQJPLFUR&+3DQGFRPPXQLW\KHDWLQJZLWKRXW&+3

6$3EDQG

6$3UDWLQJ7DEOH



@`^`



1$

1$

1$

1$

1$

1$







(QHUJ\FRVWIDFWRU(&)

^>




(QHUJ\FRVWGHIODWRU6$3

D6$3UDWLQJLQGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHPV

DEDEFDVDVD

1$
V

(QHUJ\FRQVXPHGE\WKHWHFKQRORJ\N:K\HDU
&RVWRIHQHUJ\FRQVXPHG\HDU
7RWDOHQHUJ\FRVW

1$
V

(QHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHGN:K\HDU
&RVWRIHQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG\HDU

6SHFLDOIHDWXUHV$SSHQGL[4

1$
1$


(QHUJ\FRQVXPHGE\WKHWHFKQRORJ\N:K\HDU
&RVWRIHQHUJ\FRQVXPHG\HDU

F

1$
F

0LFUR&+3
(QHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHGN:K\HDU
&RVWRIHQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG\HDU




E
E

:LQG
(QHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHGN:K\HDU
&RVWRIHQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG\HDU






39
(QHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHGN:K\HDU
&RVWRIHQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG\HDU

5HQHZDEOHDQGHQHUJ\VDYLQJWHFKQRORJLHV$SSHQGLFHV0DQG1

$GGLWLRQDOVWDQGLQJFKDUJHV7DEOH







(QHUJ\IRUOLJKWLQJ FDOFXODWHGLQ$SSHQGL[/





3XPSDQGIDQHQHUJ\FRVW

1$


D

D

D

:DWHUKHDWLQJFRVWRWKHUIXHO

2IISHDNFRVW

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5

0UV1DRPL0LVNLQ

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG 



(QHUJ\IRUOLJKWLQJIURP$SSHQGL[/

E RUE 

F RUF 

:LQGHQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG

0LFUR&+3HQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG

(QHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHGLQGZHOOLQJ$SSHQGLFHV0DQG1
39HQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG
 RU 



(OHFWULFLW\IRUSXPSVDQGIDQVIURPER[ RU 

1$

V RUV 

(QHUJ\FRQVXPHGE\WKHWHFKQRORJ\$SSHQGL[4

&





VD

VD



F

E









E

D



3DJHRI

6$3:RUNVKHHW9HUVLRQ

85110LVNLQ9
3ODQ$VVHVVRU9

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

(QHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHGLQGZHOOLQJ$SSHQGLFHV0DQG1













1$

1$

(OHFWULFLW\IRUSXPSVDQGIDQVIURPER[ RU 

1$

1$

1$


(QHUJ\IRUOLJKWLQJIURP$SSHQGL[/

1$

1$

1$



7\SHIUDFWLRQ
  D
7\SHIUDFWLRQ
  E

1$







6SDFHDQGZDWHUKHDWLQJ

(QHUJ\IRUZDWHUKHDWLQJ

(QHUJ\IRUZDWHUKHDWLQJ

6SDFHDQGZDWHUKHDWLQJ

E  





(QHUJ\IRUZDWHUKHDWLQJIURPER[D

(QHUJ\IRUZDWHUKHDWLQJ

1$



1$



6SDFHKHDWLQJVHFRQGDU\IURPER[D

6SDFHKHDWLQJPDLQIURPER[

D3ULPDU\HQHUJ\IRULQGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHPV LQFOXGLQJPLFUR&+3DQGFRPPXQLW\KHDWLQJZLWKRXW&+3

(QHUJ\
3ULPDU\HQHUJ\
3ULPDU\HQHUJ\
N:K\HDU
N:K\HDU
IDFWRU
,QGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHP

(,EDQG















1$

1$

1$







1$

1$



(,UDWLQJ

&DUERQGLR[LGHHPLVVLRQVUDWH

VDVD

1$

V RUV 

(QHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHGLQGZHOOLQJ$SSHQGL[4

7RWDO&2 NJ\HDU

1$

1$

1$

1$





 RU 

0LFUR&+3HQHUJ\FRQVXPHG



1$

>DDEE@

1$

7\SHIUDFWLRQ
  E

(QHUJ\IRUZDWHUKHDWLQJ

6SDFHDQGZDWHUKHDWLQJ

1$

>@RU>@

7\SHIUDFWLRQ
  D

(QHUJ\IRUZDWHUKHDWLQJ

6SDFHDQGZDWHUKHDWLQJ

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5
0UV1DRPL0LVNLQ

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG 

 

 

1$

1$

1$

:LQGHQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG



1$

7DEOH
7DEOH

1$

7DEOH

1$



1$

1$



1$



7DEOH

7DEOH

>   @

1$

1$

ER[ 

3DJHRI

6$3:RUNVKHHW9HUVLRQ

85110LVNLQ9
3ODQ$VVHVVRU9

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 
E 

39HQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG

(QHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHGLQGZHOOLQJ$SSHQGL[0

(QHUJ\IRUOLJKWLQJIURP$SSHQGL[/

7RWDO3(DVVRFLDWHGZLWKERLOHUV&+3RUUHFRYHUHGJHRWKHUPDOKHDW
,IQHJDWLYHHQWHULQER[ 

(OHFWULFLW\IRUSXPSVDQGIDQVER[ 

6SDFHKHDWLQJIURPERLOHUV

6SDFHKHDWLQJIURP&+3RUUHFRYHUHGJHRWKHUPDOKHDWER[ 


1$





1$

1$



1$

1$

1$

3ULPDU\HQHUJ\N:K\HDU

V RUV 

1$

1$

1$

1$

3ULPDU\HQHUJ\N:KP\HDU

V RUV 

(QHUJ\FRQVXPHGE\WKHDERYHWHFKQRORJ\$SSHQGL[4

 RU 

(QHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHGLQGZHOOLQJ$SSHQGL[4

0LFUR&+3HQHUJ\FRQVXPHG

F RUF 

0LFUR&+3HQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG

 RU 
E RUE 

:LQGHQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG

39HQHUJ\SURGXFHGRUVDYHG

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW


  

 
   

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

&%

 )  "
#0"#0"1#0"/#0"/(#0"/#0"/)#0"/# !

/ !
 !

 !
/ !

 ( ) , )

 ( )   )  ,- -

 ( ) ) . )

"
#
"
&#

%'
%''
%''

%' 9 8% "
3# 4
: !

"
#0"
#0"
1#0"
/#0"
'#0"
$# !

"
3#

 

7 ; "= 9 &%
#


6
 1 =6

 7 =6 /%1%

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

< '
) (   , (+ -  8 4 : 0 "
#
 (5 "
&#  "
&# ! "
#
%


& 

 

   
" 




" 

) 

; )

 
   !!
"!
!
#

"$" 
 

*. )    . ,,

"
$#

"
'#

%'

)  . ((+  %'   

%

"
/#

8"

# 9
: %
!

%

7 )

) ,  )      

"
#

"
1#

%


%1'

4 (5 "3# !

$LUFKDQJHVSHUKRXU

* )6  

    


"

#

"&#

"&#

"#

"$#

"3#

"
#

"
#





PSHUKRXU

$%

$%

9ROXPH
P

%

 ( ) +   .

 

  
   "
&#

)   * + )  ) ! "$#0"#0"&#0"&# !

%'

$YHUDJHVWRUH\
KHLJKWP

"
#0"#0"1#0"/#0"/*#0"/#0"/.#0"/# !

"'#

"
#

 ( ) * +

9HQWLODWLRQUDWH

2. - 

&%

$UHDP

 

2YHUDOOGZHOOLQJGLPHQVLRQV

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$GGUHVV

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG




&OLHQW

$VVHVVRU1DPH

 
  
 
       
     


1+(5

  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG




"# 0 "#

&%

 

$3%

&%
"1#

%
3

%1

%'

%

%'

 9 -

@

"3#0"$#0"$#0"$(#0"#0"&#0"&#0"1#0"1#0"1
# !

"1$#
"1#

/%/

%''

"1'#0"13# !
"1$# "'# !

E  *))* ;B
E  ,  "EF# ; CB

1'1%


%/&

"/#

 

7 ; "= 9 &%
#


6
 1 =6

 7 =6 /%1%

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

2(  ) (
*  "*#



   !
"
  //
+ +
0

" 1! ! '
 

G.+ * )    ) (
*  "(#

"1&#

"13#

/
%'1

:DWHUKHDWLQJHQHUJ\UHTXLUHPHQWN:K\HDU

"1'#

%&3

"11#0"1/# !
"'# %11 "3# !

"1/#

"11#

"1#

"&#

=  

%

$%

/%$

"#

"3#

"$#

"'#

"/#

"1(#

"1#

"1#

"(#

"#

"#

"
#

"#

 )(*  

/%&'

1%

!
!

%

$%/

7A ";B#

%3

%3

7

7

7

7

7

%/3

%'

"# 0 "# !

"(#

  (. 9 "5 # ** . 7,,5 B



"
" ' !   (% 
)*  
+

(*   ;B

, !
! 
" 
&!
!-.&  "
& 
"

  )   7 C

)

/%

/%

2

;

/%

(/(0(17
; D

7 " C#

# )  -    ,- , - ) )

LI  WKHQ RWKHUZLVH >
(IIHFWLYHDLUFKDQJHUDWHHQWHU RUD RUE RU LQER[

*# )   5* -  ,- , - ) 

LI  WKHQE RWKHUZLVHE 

(# ) (*   ** -   *-+

+HDWORVVHVDQGKHDWORVVSDUDPHWHU

"
# !

 ., "*# !

"
&#

9 8%$' "#: !

))**+  > . ) 9 )* !

# ) (*   ** -   *-+

) (*   *-+

) (*   ** - +

?* ))*-  *.  )  ,,*( *

7@ ) 

 )*

 ( )   * 

 
  !!
"!
 
 ! 

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5


  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG




"/
# "/
# 13' !

"''#

"'/#

"'1(#

"'1#

"'1#

"'#

"'
#

 

7 ; "= 9 &%
#


6
 1 =6

 7 =6 /%1%

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

33%/

3%1

; .
"'1# 0 "'1(# 0 "'/# 9 "'1# !

%

7 . ) ( '

  .


%/3

* )  .    .+ .. "**  7,,5 F#

"'# 4 %$3 !

'1$%''

:DWWV

//%1'

F. ,,* *.  (* "( '#

,QWHUQDOJDLQV

E . )  .

%' 8"1&#0"/&#:0% 8"/#0"/$#0"/#: !

 +3
 
    



!
"!


"

1
1
%/3

"'#

I, )   ;+

"/&#

%

"/#

%

13%

"/$#

/
3%$$

 2E; , ** . 7,,5 E " JJ )   **#

"1&#0"/#0"/$#0"/#0"/&#9"'# !

8"/1# 9 "E

#:  "/1#  "/$# ! "/3#

"/3#

"/'#

"//(#

/
3%$$

/
3%$$

? (  ) ( 1 " JJ )  * ( (#

 + **  ) ( 1

) *+ * *  . (5 "/$# ! "/3#

G "/#  "/'#  (5 "/3#

"/1# "//# "//# "//(# 13' !

%'/

G.+  )  . ;+

 , )* ) ( (

"//#

"//#

%

%&1

"/1#

"/#

7

'%

"/
#

"/
#

7

7

=  )* ) ( 

E  .  )* ) (  ";+#



"   '
!
" 
1 
 
 
++

?+ -  "# *. +  .    *+



"   '
!
" 

+
4!

 !

 
   

 55
+

(# ) )*K * *+  )*   6

G.+  )  . ;+

 , )* ) ( (

# ) )*K *  )*   ";+#6

; . 6

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5

  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG




%$$



%

%

%

%

7
C

$%

&%

/%

/%

5
( 3

%$3
%$3

5 %& 5

%$3

5 %& 5
5 %& 5

%$3

5 %& 5

.
( 3(

"3# !

"1$# !

'111%33

''&%$1

1%

/%$

$%$

"
#

"#

"$&#

"$#

"$$#

"$3#

"$'#

"$/#

"$1#

! 

7 ; "= 9 &%
#


6
 1 =6

 7 =6 /%1%

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

0 "'

!

 

#


 9  5&  


,* . <  ")# ;+

6SDFHKHDWLQJUHTXLUHPHQWV
%/ "#

"$$# 9 "$# !
2.9+ 38  1

"3&# 4 "1$# !
O  ,

"$3#: !

%/

9 "$'# !
"$1# 9 8"$/#

%
3

%'
-.   4 "'# !

 ,  ) .

'HJUHHGD\V

   ,

9)9 )*

F-.  )* " 
%#

 , ))* ( N "( &#

&%1

"$#
"$# 0 "$
# 0 "$# !

"$
#
%
3

7@  ) .

$

5 
& 5  1+1+
7@ -.   ,

"$#
%

"3&#

"3#

"3$#

"33#

"3'#

"3#

"3#

"'&#

"'$#

%

&

3
%

%&$

/%&

3&&%1

$%31

3%'/

%3&

$%$

$%$


";#

 , @  ) ( /  ,,,

L8"3&# 4 "1$#: 9 /%M %  !

"33#

"33# 4 "1$# !

"''# 0 "3'# !

8"'3# 0 %%%%% 0 "3/#:

%$

%$

%$

%$

( 3*

   , )  -.  "( #

0HDQLQWHUQDOWHPSHUDWXUH 

) . ;

 )* "( $ . F  (5 "3$##

  "F#

 . ;

67  !!
"!&
"
 ' ! 
5335

  .6

%$$

%$$



%$$

G

7**
)*
( 3

;

6RODUJDLQV

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5


  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG




"#
"1#

%
&%

"# "
#
 4 "/# !

8
9 "#: "
#
 4 "1# !

"'#

"'#

'&3%&

7

"/#

%

%
%
%


& 

 . 

&
  
1+




"'.

"

1+

 !

"1+

"3#

)XHOSULFH

7
%
!

%

%

%
!

%
!

"&#

"&#

%

%

)XHOFRVW
P+
&3%3

1%

1/$&%/

"&
#

"&#

"#

"$#

"3#

" 

7 ; "= 9 &%
#


6
 1 =6

 7 =6 /%1%

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

I9, *

I))9, )*

I9, )* "(
1  7,,5 ) ** ?#

; . * "** ))9, ))#

"&#

7

"'#

6SDFHKHDWLQJVHFRQGDU\

% 9 "&# !

%31

6SDFHKHDWLQJPDLQV\VWHP

)XHOSULFH
"(
#

)XHO
;+
"'#

:DWHUKHDWLQJ

"$)#

"$#

"$#

"$*#

"$(#

"$#0"$(#0"$*#0"$#0"$#0"$)# !

%

!

" 1+

 **+ )  (- <,  ;+

D)XHOFRVWVLQGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHPV

%

1%

"$#

 4 "3# !

N:K\HDU

"'
#


!
 .
 1+

 
" 1+

(OHFWULFLW\IRUSXPSVDQGIDQV

G.+ < )  . ;+

G))**+ )   >

"3#
&%
>9#-)1++? !
 ! 
5

 ?  5  1+

:DWHUKHDWLQJ

,* . ) "*+# ;+

,* . ) " # <  ;+

G))**+ ) *+,, + . +  > " - ) ( /  7,,5 G#

>9#-)1++? !

 ! 
5

 ?  5  1+

G))**+ )  . +  >

* )  ) *+,, + + " & 11% 
0

6SDFHKHDWLQJ

D(QHUJ\UHTXLUHPHQWVLQGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHPVLQFOXGLQJPLFUR&+3
67!  !
"
&


"  
&!'8

 
:. ; !! 


  "' 
'<=  !

 ! 
'<    !
 "'

  5& 

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5

  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG




7

"#

"
#

"&3#

7

7

%
!

%
!

%
!

%
!

%
!

%
!

%
!

%
!

%
!

%
!



7

%
&/

7

%
&/

(PLVVLRQIDFWRU
. ?I;

7

3$'%

%

/&%$

(PLVVLRQV
.?I+

"
3#

"
1#

"
#

"

#

"
#

"&&#

"&#

"&$#

"#

"
#

"&3#

"&'*#

"&'(#

"&'#

"&/#

"&1#

"&#

"&
(#

"&
#

# 

7 ; "= 9 &%
#


6
 1 =6

 7 =6 /%1%

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

7

1/$&%/

G.+ )  . ) (5 "3#

G.+ )  . "'
#  8"$(D#
 4 "
/# : !

7

'&3%&

(QHUJ\
;+

,* . *+ ) (5 "'#

,* .  ) (5 "'#

,QGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHP

D&DUERQGLR[LGHHPLVVLRQVUDWHIRULQGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHPV LQFOXGLQJPLFUR&+3DQGFRPPXQLW\KHDWLQJZLWKRXW&+3

6$3EDQG

6$3UDWLQJ7DEOH

%&


%1/
"&#: 9 1%M 4 L"'# 0 /'%M !

1'%/

7

7

7

7

7

7

1/%

1%3$

&%3

G.+ * )* "G? #

L8"&$#

%
'3%$

G.+ * ) "7 '#

D6$3UDWLQJLQGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHPV

"#0"&#0"&
#0"&
#0"&
(#0"&#0"&1#0"&/#9"&'#9"&'(#9"&'*#0"&3#9"
#0"# !

7
"#

G.+ *  (+  *.+ ;+

? ) .+ *  P+
7RWDOHQHUJ\FRVW

7
"
#

G.+ ,*  - ;+

? ) .+ ,*  - P+

6SHFLDOIHDWXUHV$SSHQGL[4

7

7
"&3#

G.+ *  (+  *.+ ;+

? ) .+ *  P+

"&'*
#

7
"&'*
#

0LFUR&+3
G.+ ,*  - ;+
? ) .+ ,*  - P+

%

%
"&'(
#
"&'(
#

:LQG
G.+ ,*  - ;+
? ) .+ ,*  - P+

%

%
"&'#

39
G.+ ,*  - ;+
? ) .+ ,*  - P+

5HQHZDEOHDQGHQHUJ\VDYLQJWHFKQRORJLHV$SSHQGLFHV0DQG1

$GGLWLRQDOVWDQGLQJFKDUJHV7DEOH

"&'#

$%


'/1%

(QHUJ\IRUOLJKWLQJ "**  7,,5 F#

$%


"$#

3XPSDQGIDQHQHUJ\FRVW

7

%31

"&#

"3#

"3#

; . * " )#

I))9, *

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5


  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG




"+,  )*#
"$D#
 4 "
/(#

G.+ )  .

'/1%

G.+ ) .. ) 7,,5 F

"&'(
#  "&'(
D#

"&'*
#  "&'*
D#

; .+ ,*  -

*9?E .+ ,*  -

G.+ ,*  -  . "7,,*  

#
= .+ ,*  -
"&'#  "&'D#

1%

7

"#  "D#

G.+ *  (+  *.+ "7,,5 Q#

13/%

'%31

"

1#

"

#

"#

"
#

"


#

"

*#

"

(#

"

#

"
&#

"
#

"
$#

"
3(#

"
3#

"
$#

$ 

7 ; "= 9 &%
#


6
 1 =6

 7 =6 /%1%

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

G.+ ,*  -  . "7,,*  

#

%
!

'/1%

%

1%

G**+ ) , ,  ) ) (5 "$#  "D#

7

G.+ ) .. ) 7,,5 F

7

G.+ )  .

7

7

7


3%'/


3%'/

7

7

!
!

7

,*   .

"+,
)*#
"$D#
 4 "
/#
"+,  )*#
"$D#
 4 "
/(#

7

%
/
%1

!
!

3
'%1

G.+ )  .

,*   .

"$(D#
 4 "
/# !

%
'

1/$&%/

G.+ )  . ) (5 "3#

G.+ )  .

7

%
'

7

'&3%&

,* . *+ ) (5 "'#

,* .  ) (5 "'#

D3ULPDU\HQHUJ\IRULQGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHPV LQFOXGLQJPLFUR&+3DQGFRPPXQLW\KHDWLQJZLWKRXW&+3

(QHUJ\
3ULPDU\HQHUJ\
3ULPDU\HQHUJ\
;+
";+#
IDFWRU
,QGLYLGXDOKHDWLQJV\VWHP

%&


%$'

%

%

(,EDQG

$&

"

# 4 "'#

7
%

!
!

7

7

&%


'/%3

/%$

7

7

/%$

(,UDWLQJ

&DUERQGLR[LGHHPLVVLRQVUDWH

"
$# 0 "
# 0 "
&# 9 "

# 0 "


# 9 "
# 0 "#

7

"
#  "
D#

G.+ ,*  -  . "7,,5 Q#

 ?I .+

7

7

7

7

%/

%/

"&3#  "&3D#

*9?E .+ * 

%

7

8"
'# 0 "
3# 0 "
'(# 0 "
3(#: !

7

7

8"

# 0 "
# 0 "
1#:  8"
'# 0 "
3#: !

G**+ ) , ,  ) ) (5 "$#  "D#

,*   .

"+,
)*#
"$D#
 4 "
/#

G.+ )  .

,*   .

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5

  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

$VVHVVRU1XPEHU

'DWH/DVW0RGLILHG




%

%

%

7

7

"$D#

 4 "
&D# !

7

7

7

; .+ ,*  -

'/1%

7

(
 !
(
 !

7

(
 !

7

%

7

7

'%31

7
9
%

9
%
(
 !

(
 !

8"
D# 0 "

D# 0 %%% 0 "

/D#: !

7

7

(5 "
$D# !

 

7 ; "= 9 &%
#


6
 1 =6

 7 =6 /%1%

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

"&'D#
"&'(
D#

= .+ ,*  -

G.+ ,*  -  . "7,,5 #

G.+ ) .. ) 7,,5 F

7RWDO3(DVVRFLDWHGZLWKERLOHUV&+3RUUHFRYHUHGJHRWKHUPDOKHDW

 "
& //
,

G**+ ) , ,  ) (5 "D#

,* . ) (

,* . ) ?E  *-.   (5 "3D#

1%3

7

7

$
%


7

7

!
!

3ULPDU\HQHUJ\N:K\HDU

"#  "D#

7

7

7

7

3ULPDU\HQHUJ\N:KPC\HDU

"
#  "
D#

G.+ *  (+  (- *.+ "7,,5 Q#

"&3#  "&3D#

G.+ ,*  -  . "7,,5 Q#

*9?E .+ * 

"&'*
#  "&'*
D#

*9?E .+ ,*  -

"&'#  "&'D#
"&'(
#  "&'(
D#

; .+ ,*  -

= .+ ,*  -

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$VVHVVRU1DPH

1+(5

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW


  

  
   

 

$#

 ' 
!. !. /!. -!. -&!. -!. -'!. -! 

- 
 

 
- 

 & ' * '

 & '   '  *+ +

 & ' ' , '

"1#

$#
/!

#
1

!

$!

#%%
#%%

!.
!.
/!.
-!.
%!.
"! 

"!

#%

1! 2
8 

#% 7 6#

1!

 

59  = 7 $#
!

;<
4
 =4

9 5 =4 -#/#

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

: %
' &   * &) +  6 2 8 .

!  &3
$! 
$! 
!
%


& 

 

   
" 




" 

' 

 '

 
   !!
"!
!
#

"$" 
 

#

/"!
/!

%/#$$

#1"

/%!. /1! 
/"! . %! 

E  (''( B
E  *  EF9!  CB

/%/#


#-$

-!

 

59  = 7 $#
!

;<
4
 =4

9 5 =4 -#/#

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

0&  ' &
(  (!



   !
"
  //
+ +
0

" 1! ! '
 

G,) ( '    ' &
(  &!

/$!

/1!

-
#%/

)/!   0  1/!2 

/%!

#-1

/-!

//!

/!

$!

//!. /-! 

#

$#/

-#"

!

1!

"!

%!

-!

/&!

/!

/!

&!

%! #// 1! 

/1#-1

/#




#

"#-

5A; B!


#1

#1

5

5

5

!

!


!

!

=  

%!

#%

'  , &&)  #%   

9(, '    , **

5

5

#-1

#%

 '&(  

-!

1!. "!. "!. "&!. !. $!. $!. /!. /!. /
! 

#

6

! 7
8 #


' *  '      

5 '

  &, 7 3 ! (( , 5**3 B



"
" ' !   (% 
)*  
+

, !
! 
" 
&!
!-.&  "
& 
"

  '   5 C

<'

#-/

#%

#

#%

; 7 +

@

/!

!

$#

 

-#

-#

0



-#

&&&,
 D

5 C!

! '  +    *+ * + ' '

LI  WKHQ RWKHUZLVH >
&%%! ' #( #( #( #)  *#+

&!

! . ! 

#/%

#


! . !

(! '   3( +  *+ * + ' 

LI  WKHQE RWKHUZLVHE 

&! ' &(   (( +   (+)

(- !$ 


! 

 ,* (! 

$!

7 6#"% !8 

( '4  

    


2 &3 1! 

%! $!

''(()  > , ' 7 '( 

! ' &(   (( +   (+)

' &(   (+)

' &(   (( + )

?( ''(+  (,  '  **(& (

5@ ' 

 '(

 & '   ( 

 
  !!
"!
 
 ! 

&(   B

!

$!

$!

!

"!

1!

!

 

!





$!

"#

"#

 
 


  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW






7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5

#

 & ' )   ,

 

  
  
$!

'   ( ) '  '  "!. !. $!. $! 

#%

 
!! 

!. !. /!. -!. -(!. -!. -,!. -! 

%!

!

 & ' ( )

#  

0, + 

$#

 "

 

    

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO








 

 

 
  
 
       
     


1+(5


  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






-
! -
! /1% 

/$!. -!. -"!. -!. -$!7 %! 

%%!

%-!

%/&!

%/!

%/!

%!

%
!

 

59  = 7 $#
!

;<
4
 =4

9 5 =4 -#/#

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

11#-

1#/

 ,
%/! . %/&! . %-! 7 %/! 

#

5 , ' & %

  ,


#-1

<( '  ,    ,) ,, ((  5**3 F!

%! 2 #"1 

%/"#%%

/

--#/%

F, **( (,  &( & %!

+4   

E , '  ,

#% 6 /$!. -$!8.# 6 -!. -"!. -!8 

 +3
 
    



!
"!


"

/
/
#-1

%!

#

I* '   )

-$!

#

-!

 0E * (( , 5**3 E  JJ '   ((!

/1#

? &  ' & /  JJ '  ( & &!

9 ) ((  ' & /

-"!

-
1#""

' () ( (  , &3 -"!  -1!

6 -/! 7 E

!8  -/!  -"!  -1!

-1!

-%!

--&!

-
1#""

-
1#""

G -!  -%!  &3 -1!

-/! --! --! --&! /1% 

#%-

G,)  '  , )

 * '( ' & &

--!

--!

#

#$/

-/!

-!

5

%#

-
!

-
!

5

5

=  '( ' & 

E  ,  '( ' &  )!



"   '
!
" 
1 
 
 
++

?) +  ! (, )  ,    ()



"   '
!
" 

+
4!

 !

 
   

 55
+

&! ' '(K ( ()  '(   4

G,)  '  , )

 * '( ' & &

! ' '(K (  '(   )!4

 , 4

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5

  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






#""



#

#

#

#

5
C

"#

$#

-#

-#

3
& 1

#"1
#"1

3 #$ 3

#"1

3 #$ 3
3 #$ 3

#"1

3 #$ 3

,
& 1&

1! 

#-

/"! 

%$%"#

1
#%

/#-

-#-%

"#1$


!

!

"$!

"!

""!

"1!

"%!

"-!

"/!

! 

59  = 7 $#
!

;<
4
 =4

9 5 =4 -#/#

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

0 "'

!

 

#


 9  5&  


*( , :  '! )

:6$%! 0  
!

""! 7 "! 
0,7) 38  1

1$! 2 /"! 
O  *

"1!8 

#-

7 "%! 
"/! 7 6 "-!

#
1

#%
+,   2 %! 

 *  ' ,

9 

   *

<7'7 '(

F+,  '(  
#!

 * ''( & N & $!

#$1

"!
"! . "
! . "! 

"
!
#$

5@  ' ,

$

5 
& 5  1+1+
5@ +,   *

"!
#

1$!

1!

1"!

11!

1%!

1!

1!

%$!

%"!

#"

7

1%#""

#$

-#%-

1$$#/

"#1/

1#%-

#1$

"#"

"#"


!

 * @  ' & -  ***
L6 1$! 2 /"!8 7 -#M # < 

11!

11! 2 /"! 

%%! . 1%! 

6 %1! . ##### . 1-!8

#"

#"

#"

#"


& 1(

   * '  +,  & !

8    $ 

;' , 

; '( & " , F<  &3 1"!!

  F<!

 , 

67  !!
"!&
"
 ' ! 
5335

  ,4

#""

#""



#""

G

5((
'(
& 1



56 

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5


  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






/!

$#

G''(() '  , )  >

!

6
7 !8

!
 2 -! 


!
 2 /! 

%!

%!

11
$#"$

5

-!

#

#
#




"'.

"

1+

 !

"1+

1!

%!

$!

"'!

"!

"!

?$%

5

# 7 $! 

5

#1/

?$%
&
!

#


#

#

#


#


$!

$!

#

#

?%
P)

"#$

/#

/-"$#-

$
!

$!

!

"!

1!

" 

59  = 7 $#
!

;<
4
 =4

9 5 =4 -#/#

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

I7* (

I''7* '(

I7* '( &
/  5**3  ' (( ?9;!

 , ( (( ''7* ''!

/! 

6$%! '% 

6$%! '   

?
)
%!

#


& 

 . 

&
  
1+

"(!

"&!

"!. "&!. "(!. "!. "!. "'! 

#

!

" 1+

 (() '  &+ :*  )

>?%' !   

#

/#

"!

 2 1! 

1/!2 

%
!


!
 .
 1+

 
" 1+

&%% $ $  =

G,) : '  , )

G''(() '   >

1!
$#
>9#-)1++? !
 ! 
5

 ?  5  1+

/! =

*( , ' ()! )

*( , ' ! :  )

G''(() ' ()** ) , )  >  + ' & -  5**3 G!

>9#-)1++? !

 ! 
5

 ?  5  1+

!

#

( '  ' ()** ) ) & 11% 
0

6$%! =

:&  0  ' !   ; %  %'
-<
67!  !
"
&


"  
&!'8

 
:. ; !! 


  "' 
'<=  !

 ! 
'<    !
 "'

  5& 

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5

  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






5

5
$1!

G,) (  &)  (,) )

? ' ,) (  P)

!


!

$1!

$%(
!

5

5

#


#


#


#


#


#


#


#


#


#




5

#
$-

5

#
$-

&  %
, ?I

5

1"%#

#

-#-

&  
,?I)

1!

/!

!


!

!

$$!

$!

$"!

!


!

$1!

$%(!

$%&!

$%!

$-!

$/!

$!

$
&!

$
!

# 

59  = 7 $#
!

;<
4
 =4

9 5 =4 -#/#

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

5

/-"$#-

G,) '  , ' &3 1!

G,) '  , %
!  6 "&D!
 2
-! 8 

5

11
$#"$

& 
)

*( , () ' &3 %!

*( ,  ' &3 %!

4 !   =

#
 *   !     %  %'
-< %   ! !
-<

6
< 

6
< ,)

#$


#-
$!8 7 /#M 2 L %! . -%#M 

-1#%-

5

5

5

5

5

5

/-#

/#1"

$#1

G,) ( '( G?!

L6 $"!

#
%1#"

G,) ( ' 59 %!

6
< ' !   

!. $!. $
!. $
!. $
&!. $!. $/!. $-!7 $%!7 $%&!7 $%(!. $1!7 
!. ! 

5
!

G,) (  &)  (,) )

? ' ,) (  P)
,  %

5

!

G,) *(  + )

? ' ,) *(  + P)

6$%
$$ *A

5

5
$%(
!

#

%
-<
G,) *(  + )
? ' ,) *(  + P)

$%&
!

#
$%&
!

/ 
G,) *(  + )
? ' ,) *(  + P)

#

#
$%!

<
G,) *(  + )
? ' ,) *(  + P)

@    ' %! 
$$ % 

   %!,#

$%!

"#


%-/#

&  !  ((  5**3 F!

"#


"!

< $    %

5

#1/

$!

1!

1!

 , (  '!

I''7* (

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5


  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






)*  '(!

"D!
 2
-&!

G,) '  ,

%-/#

G,) ' ,, ' 5**3 F

$%&
!  $%&
D!

$%(
!  $%(
D!

 ,) *(  +

(7?E9 ,) *(  +

G,) *(  +  , 5**(  

!
9= ,) *(  +
$%!  $%D!

/#

5

!  D!

G,) (  &)  (,) 5**3 Q!

"&D!
 2
-! 

/1-#

%#1/

/!

!

!


!

!

(!

&!

!

$!

!

"!

1&!

1!

"!

$ 

59  = 7 $#
!

;<
4
 =4

9 5 =4 -#/#

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

G,) *(  +  , 5**(  

!

#


%-/#

#

/#

G(() ' * *  ' ' &3 "!  D!

5

G,) ' ,, ' 5**3 F

5

G,) '  ,

5

5

5


1
-#"

1
-#"

5

5




#
-
#/




"1
#"1

*(   ,

)*
'(!

"D!
 2
-!
)*  '(!
"D!
 2
-&!

5

#
%

5

#
%

G,) '  ,

*(   ,

5

/-"$#-

G,) '  , ' &3 1!

G,) '  ,

5

11
$#"$

*( , () ' &3 %!

*( ,  ' &3 %!

(<    ; !     %  %'

-< %   ! !
-<
& 
<    
<   
)
)!
%
4 !   =

-#/

-/#

#

#

&4 

"

! 2 %!

5
#




5

5

$#


%-#1

$%$#-

5

5

$%$#-

&4 

 *  

"! .
! .
$! 7

! .


! 7 
! . !

5


!  
D!

G,) *(  +  , 5**3 Q!

 ?I ,)

5

5

5

5

#-

#-

$1!  $1D!

(7?E9 ,) ( 

#

5

6
%! .
1! .
%&! .
1&!8 

5

5

6

! .
! .
/!8  6
%! .
1!8 

G(() ' * *  ' ' &3 "!  D!

*(   ,

)*
'(!

"D!
 2
-!

G,) '  ,

*(   ,

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5

  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






"D!

 2
$D! 

5

5

 ,) *(  +

%-/#

&
 
&
 

5

&
 

5

#

5

5

%#1/

5
7
#

7
#

5

-1#"/

/-$#"

#

#

#

5

5

5

&
 

&
 

&3
"D! 

6
D! .

D! . ### .

-D!8 

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

 

59  = 7 $#
!

;<
4
 =4

9 5 =4 -#/#

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

$%D!
$%&
D!

9= ,) *(  +

G,) *(  +  , 5**3 !

G,) ' ,, ' 5**3 F

,<&%!;

-<%2! !

 "
& //
,

G(() ' * *  ' &3 D!

*( , ' &

*( , ' ?E9  (+,   &3 1D!

<    1/!2 C2 

5

!  D!

<    1/!2 


!  
D!

G,) (  &)  &+ (,) 5**3 Q!

$1!  $1D!

G,) *(  +  , 5**3 Q!

(7?E9 ,) ( 

$%(
!  $%(
D!

(7?E9 ,) *(  +

$%!  $%D!
$%&
!  $%&
D!

 ,) *(  +

9= ,) *(  +

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW


  

 
   

 

%$

 (  !
"/!"/!0"/!."/!.'"/!."/!.("/!."

.



.

 ' ( + (

 ' (   (  +, ,

 ' ( ( - (

#2$

%$
!0"

$
2

$

!
"
!
%"

$&&
$&&

!
"/!
"/!
0"/!
."/!
&"/!
#"

!
#"

$&

$& 8 7$ !
2" 3
9

!
2"

 

6; : !? 8 %$
"

=>
5
 . ?5

; 6 ?5 .$0$

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

< &
( '   + '* ,  7 3 9 / !
"
 '4 !
%"  !
%" !
"
%


& 

 

   
" 




" 

( 

: (

 
   !!
"!
!
#

"$" 
 

;)- (    - ++

!0#"
!0"

2$0%

$##

!0&"/!02"
!0#" .!&"

  )(() :D
  +  !G;" : ED

0&0$


$.%

!."

 

6; : !? 8 %$
"

=>
5
 . ?5

; 6 ?5 .$0$

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

1'  ( '
)  !)"



   !
"
  //
+ +
0

" 1! ! '
 

H-* ) (    ( '
)  !'"

!0%"

!02"

.
$&0

)/!   0  1/!2 

!0&"

$2

!00"/!0."
!&" $00 !2"

!0."

!00"

!0"

!%"

!"

!2"

!#"

!&"

!."

!0'"

!0"

!0"

!'"

!"

!"

!
"

!"

?  

!
&"

$&

(  - ''*  $&   

$

%$#

.$#

..$2

0$

$

#$.

6C= !:D"

$2

$2

6

6

6

6

6

$.2

$&

 (')  

!
."

!2"/!#"/!#"/!#'"/!"/!%"/!%"/!0"/!0"/!0
"

$

7!

" 8
9 $

( +  (      

6 (

  '- 8 !4 " )) - 6++4 D



"
" ' !   (% 
)*  
+

, !
! 
" 
&!
!-.&  "
& 
"

  (   6 E

>(

$&0

$&

$

$&

= 8 ,

@

!
0"

!
"

%$

 

.$

.$

1

:

.$

&&&,
: F

6 ! E"

" (  ,    +, + , ( (

LI  WKHQ RWKHUZLVH >
&%%! ' #( #( #( #)  *#+

!" / !"

!'"

$0&

$


!" / !"

)" (   4) ,  +, + , ( 

LI  WKHQE RWKHUZLVHE 

'" ( ')   )) ,   ),*

(- !$ 

!
"

 -+ !)"

!
%"

8 7$#& !"9

) (5  

    


3 '4 !2"

%! $!

(())*  @ - ( 8 ()

" ( ')   )) ,   ),*

( ')   ),*

( ')   )) , *

A) ((),  )-  (  ++)' )

6B ( 

 ()

 ' (   ) 

 
  !!
"!
 
 ! 

')   :D

!

"

!%"

!%"

!"

!#"

!2"

!
"

 

!
"





$!

#$

#$

 
 


  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW






7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5

$

 ' ( *   -

 

  
   !
%"

(   ) * (  ( !#"/!"/!%"/!%"

$&

 
!! 

!
"/!"/!0"/!."/!.)"/!."/!.-"/!."

!&"

!
"

 ' ( ) *

#  

1- , 

%$

 "

 

    

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO








 

 

 
  
 
       
     


1+(5


  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






!.
" !.
" 02&

!0%"/!."/!.#"/!."/!.%"8!&"

!&&"

!&."

!&0'"

!&0"

!&0"

!&"

!&
"

 

6; : !? 8 %$
"

=>
5
 . ?5

; 6 ?5 .$0$

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

22$.

2$0

: -
!&0" / !&0'" / !&." 8 !&0"

$

6 - ( ' &

  -


$.2

>) (  -    -* -- !))  6++4 G"

!&" 3 $#2

&0#$&&

/

..$0&

G- ++) )-  ') !' &"

+4   

 - (  -

$& 7!0%"/!.%"9/$ 7!."/!.#"/!."9

 +3
 
    



!
"!


"

0
0
$.2

!&"

$

J+ (   :*

!.%"

$

!."

 1: + )) - 6++4  ! KK (   ))"

02$

A '  ( ' 0 ! KK (  ) ' '"

; * ))  ( ' 0

!.#"

.
2$##

( )* ) )  - '4 !.#" !.2"

7!.0" 8 !

"9  !.0"  !.#" !.2"

!.2"

!.&"

!..'"

.
2$##

.
2$##

H !."  !.&"  '4 !.2"

!.0" !.." !.." !..'" 02&

$&.

H-*  (  - :*

 + () ( ' '

!.."

!.."

$

$%0

!.0"

!."

6

&$

!.
"

!.
"

6

6

?  () ( ' 

  -  () ( '  !:*"



"   '
!
" 
1 
 
 
++

A* ,  !" )- *  -    )*



"   '
!
" 

+
4!

 !

 
   

 55
+

'" ( ()L ) )*  ()   5

H-*  (  - :*

 + () ( ' '

" ( ()L )  ()   !:*"5

: - 5

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5

  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






$##



$

$

$

$

6
E

#$

%$

.$

.$

4
' 2

$#2
$#2

4 $% 4

$#2

4 $% 4
4 $% 4

$#2

4 $% 4

' 2'

!2"

!0#"

2.
.$#.

2.&$%

0$0%

.$.

#$20

!
"

!"

!#%"

!#"

!##"

!#2"

!#&"

!#."

!#0"

! 

6; : !? 8 %$
"

=>
5
 . ?5

; 6 ?5 .$0$

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

0 "'

!

 

#


 9  5&  


+) - <  !(" :*

:6$%! 0  
$. !"

!##" 8 !#"
1-8* 38  1

!2%" 3 !0#"
  +

!#2"9

$.

8 !#&"
!#0" 8 7!#."

$
2

$&0
,-   3 !&"

 +  ( -

9 

   +

>8(8 ()

G,-  () ! 
$"

 + (() ' O !' %"

$%

!#"
!#" / !#
" / !#"

!#
"
$&

6B  ( -

$

5 
& 5  1+1+
6B ,-   +

!#"
$

!2%"

!2"

!2#"

!22"

!2&"

!2"

!2"

!&%"

!&#"

$2

7

2$0&

$%

.$0

2%%$0

#$20

2$&.

$2%

#$#

#$#


!:"

 + B  ( ' .  +++

M7!2%" 3 !0#"9 8 .$N $ >

!22"

!22" 3 !0#"

!&&" / !2&"

7!&2" / $$$$$ / !2."9

$#

$#

$#

$#


' 2)

   + (  ,-  !' "

8    $ 

=( - :

= () !' # - G>  '4 !2#""

  !G>"

 - :

67  !!
"!&
"
 ' ! 
5335

  -5

$##

$##



$##

H

6))
()
' 2

:

56 

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5


  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






!0"

%$

H(())* (  - *  @

!" !
"
 3 !."

7
8 !"9 !
"
 3 !0"

!&"

!&"

#
#$.%

6

!."

$

$
$
$


& 

 . 

&
  
1+




"'.

"

1+

 !

"1+

!2"

?$%

6

$

$

$

$

$

!%"

!%"

$

$

?%
P*


2$


0$

0.#%$.

!%
"

!%"

!"

!#"

!2"

" 

6; : !? 8 %$
"

=>
5
 . ?5

; 6 ?5 .$0$

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

J8+ )

J((8+ ()

!%"

6

!&"

$ 8 !%"

$20

?$%
!'
"

?
:*
!&"

J8+ () !'
0  6++4  ( )) A;="

: - ) !)) ((8+ (("

/! 

6$%! '% 

6$%! '   

!#("

!#"

!#"

!#)"

!#'"

!#"/!#'"/!#)"/!#"/!#"/!#("

$

!

" 1+

 ))* (  ', <+  :*

>?%' !   

$

0$

!#"

 3 !2"

1/!2 

!&
"


!
 .
 1+

 
" 1+

&%% $ $  =

H-* < (  - :*

H(())* (   @

!2"
%$
>9#-)1++? !
 ! 
5

 ?  5  1+

/! =

+) - ( !)*" :*

+) - ( ! " <  :*

H(())* ( )*++ * - *  @ ! , ( ' .  6++4 H"

>9#-)1++? !

 ! 
5

 ?  5  1+

!"

$

) (  ( )*++ * * ! & 11% 

0

6$%! =

:&  0  ' !   ; %  %'
-<
67!  !
"
&


"  
&!'8

 
:. ; !! 


  "' 
'<=  !

 ! 
'<    !
 "'

  5& 

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5

  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






6

!"

!
"

!%2"

6

6

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

#%

6

$
%.

6

$
%.

&  %
- AJ:

6

2#&$

$

0$#0

&  
-AJ*

!
2"

!
0"

!
"

!

"

!
"

!%%"

!%"

!%#"

!"

!
"

!%2"

!%&)"

!%&'"

!%&"

!%."

!%0"

!%"

!%
'"

!%
"

# 

6; : !? 8 %$
"

=>
5
 . ?5

; 6 ?5 .$0$

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

6

0.#%$.

H-* (  - ( '4 !2"

H-* (  - !&
"  7!#'F"
 3 !
." 9

6

#
#$.%

& 
:*

+) - )* ( '4 !&"

+) -  ( '4 !&"

4 !   =

#
 *   !     %  %'
-< %   ! !
-<

6
< 

6
< ,)

$%


$.#
!%"9 8 0$N 3 M!&" / .&$N

&.$

6

6

6

6

6

6

0.$

0$2#

%$2

H-* ) () !HA"

M7!%#"

$
&2$#

H-* ) ( !6; &"

6
< ' !   

!"/!%"/!%
"/!%
"/!%
'"/!%"/!%0"/!%."8!%&"8!%&'"8!%&)"/!%2"8!
"/!"

6
!"

H-* )  '*  )-* :*

A ( -* )  P*
,  %

6
!
"

H-* +)  , :*

A ( -* +)  , P*

6$%
$$ *A

6

6
!%2"

H-* )  '*  )-* :*

A ( -* )  P*

!%&)
"

6
!%&)
"

%
-<
H-* +)  , :*
A ( -* +)  , P*

$

$
!%&'
"
!%&'
"

/ 
H-* +)  , :*
A ( -* +)  , P*

$

$
!%&"

<
H-* +)  , :*
A ( -* +)  , P*

@    ' %! 
$$ % 

   %!,#

!%&"

#$


&.0$

&  !  !))  6++4 G"

#$


!#"

< $    %

6

$20

!%"

!2"

!2"

: - ) ! ("

J((8+ )

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5


  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






&.0$

H-* ( -- ( 6++4 G

!%&'
"  !%&'
F"

!%&)
"  !%&)
F"

: -* +)  ,

)8A; -* +)  ,

H-* +)  ,  - !6++)  

"
;? -* +)  ,
!%&"  !%&F"

0$

H))* ( + +  ( ( '4 !#"  !F"

6

!"  !F"

H-* )  '*  )-* !6++4 Q"

!

0"

!

"

!"

!
"

!


"

!

)"

!

'"

!

"

!
%"

!
"

!
#"

!
2'"

!
2"

!
#"

$ 

6; : !? 8 %$
"

=>
5
 . ?5

; 6 ?5 .$0$

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

H-* +)  ,  - !6++)  

"

02.$

$

&$20

&.0$

$

0$

6

6

H))* ( + +  ( ( '4 !#"  !F"

6

6

6


%#$%

H-* ( -- ( 6++4 G

6

6

6


%#$%

!*+
()"

!#F"
 3 !
."
!*+  ()"
!#F"
 3 !
.'"

6

.
$0

$


%2$2

+)   -

H-* (  -

H-* (  -

+)   -

!#'F"
 3 !
."

$
&

0.#%$.

H-* (  - ( '4 !2"

H-* (  -

6

$
&

6

#
#$.%

+) - )* ( '4 !&"

+) -  ( '4 !&"

(<    ; !     %  %'

-< %   ! !
-<
& 
<    
<   
:*
!:*"
%
4 !   =

&4 

&$.&

0.
$#

##

!

" 3 !&"

$

$

$

6

6

6

%$


&.$2

&#$#.

6

6

&#$#.

&4 

 *  

!
#" / !
" / !
%" 8 !

" / !


" 8 !
" / !"

6

!
"  !
F"

H-* +)  ,  - !6++4 Q"

 AJ -*

6

6

6

6

$.

$.

!%2"  !%2F"

)8A; -* ) 

$

6

7!
&" / !
2" / !
&'" / !
2'"9

6

!*+  ()"

!#F"
 3 !
.'"

H-* (  -

+)   -

6

7!

" / !
" / !
0"9  7!
&" / !
2"9

!*+
()"

!#F"
 3 !
."

H-* (  -

+)   -

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5

  

6$3:RUNVKHHW 'HVLJQ  'UDIW

 






!#F"

 3 !
%F"

6

6

6

: -* +)  ,

&.0$

6

'

'


6

'


6

$

6

6

&$20

6
8
$

8
$
'


'


7!
F" / !

F" / $$$ / !

.F"9

6

6

'4 !
#F"

 

6; : !? 8 %$
"

=>
5
 . ?5

; 6 ?5 .$0$

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

!%&F"
!%&'
F"

;? -* +)  ,

H-* +)  ,  - !6++4 "

H-* ( -- ( 6++4 G

,<&%!;

-<%2! !

 "
& //
,

H))* ( + +  ( '4 !F"

+) - ( '

+) - ( A;  ),-   '4 !2F"

&0$#

6

$
$

.$&&

6

6

$

6

6

6

<    1/!2 

!"  !F"

6

6

6

6

<    1/!2 E2 

!
"  !
F"

H-* )  '*  ', )-* !6++4 Q"

!%2"  !%2F"

H-* +)  ,  - !6++4 Q"

)8A; -* ) 

!%&)
"  !%&)
F"

)8A; -* +)  ,

!%&"  !%&F"
!%&'
"  !%&'
F"

: -* +)  ,

;? -* +)  ,

7KLVGUDIW6$3:RUNVKHHWUHSRUWLVIRULQWHUQDOSXUSRVHVRQO\DQGVKRXOGQRWEHDFFHSWHGDVHYLGHQFHRI 
FRPSOLDQFHE\%XLOGLQJ&RQWURO

 

1+(5